The physics of time and space is highly sophisticated. It has been imagined and developed by the brightest minds, and most of its claims are evidently right. Yet for me there is something missing, which is a true understanding of what the fundaments are. They kind of dissapear into a mist of equations once you learn about quantum physics, the schrodinger equation and the uncertainty principle. All these things are way beyond the uneducated to understand, you’d think. But so is cuneiform writing. This does not mean you can’t understand a translation from cuneiform.
For me the new inspiration came with the news that the LIGO detector had detected the merging of two black holes in the distant past. This event shook the gravitational field and the ripples eventually arrived on Earth and where picked up as a crescendo hum, that ended abruptly. What did it mean to me? That space was a rigid crystal that could transmit these kind of distortions. Like a block of steal you hit with a hammer on one side. You can exactly predict how the material transmits the deformation to the other side, where it will reflect back against its own molecular strength.
We wrote about the idea of collapsing space in another post. But there we still worked with the idea of a springy action between points in space able to contain energy.
The above is quite a novel way of looking at space for some, but it makes a lot of sense. Yet its not clear if I understand any of it. As a result of investigating the above I learned that others have thought about space as a deformed material. Any particle it space is a type of deformation, a folding of the fabric so to say. This sounded plausible to me. I found a book about it, and another scientist that imagined the same and showed it casued the constants used in astrophysics to roll out automatically [links to be inserted].
But this really still doesn’t explain much of what is happening. And I for some impractical reason would like to know. I am looking for the LEGO blocks of space. I don’t believe in time by the way, time is not real, it is only real if you accept crude memories of a past, extreme compressions of reality. We humans can imagine the past, we experience time. The role of time is to allow predictions, which is the primary function of our intelligence, to furnish us with predictions so we can make safe choices. It does distract and distort the conversation quite a bit. Especially because we’d like our ability to remember the distant past and future to be mirrored in some real process in reality, like time travel being possible.
Years ago already I imagined reality to be a membrane on which things changed, in 2d as a simplification. Not moving forwards through time, but simply existing as a surface of a giant pond, filled with waves, eddies and flows. Perhaps most like a air, with sounds, wind, high and low pressure areas, whirlwinds. That is what space is like and there is only space.
But what about matter? Well, I though matter would simply be folded space. I did not know how really, how can space fold. Now I think something new, which is that space is made of the fields, and that it can be broken up rather easily. Question : Is a bowling ball a piece of space moving through space, or is it like an image on a monitor, not really anywhere, ‘represented’ by the pixels, different pixels at different time, where the pixels represent a static space. I tend towards the first. A bowling ball is a spherical chunk of space that can move through space.
We all know that a bowling ball is made of resin and a core, so we can say “but its made out of resin! with a core!”. Yes, those molecules are hanging together to be the bolwing ball, but they are space too. This is where it gets interesting imho. If we make it super simple, we take a hydrogen atom, we know that it is surrounded by an electron. We can interact with the electron, raise its ‘orbit’ and kick it ouf of its orbit. I think an electron ‘in orbit’ is a different animal from a ‘free’ electron. For starters its a lot smaller. But what I think it is is a flat piece of space that has folded around the nucleus. In this flat space something strange is going on. I know to little of physics to know if the following is already a thing.
An electron when orbiting a nucleus is a spherically moving process of creation and annihiliation of space. The process is two dimensional. Somehow it shapes space so that its progression is stabile. What happens on the ‘front’ of this proces? Space is created and destroyed. The act of creation of space is a quantum of momentum. Energy is conserved in this process, energy is momentum.
The spring and ball model of spacetime is an adaption to recent insights, but still naive as to what are the springs and what the balls. Assuming points and bars allows for spring and ball phenomena like multi frequency traveling waves in the medium, the ‘mesh’.
Just imagine a single point where there is nothing else. Then the next moment there are two points. Then the two points can annihilate -if- another point is created. This is happening everywhere all the time as a matter of stabile orbiting, movement, vibration of matter around us. Quantum physics talks about waves of various frequencies and assumes they are distributed and exist even in a complete vacuum. I agree. but what exists is the process of traveling fronts of space annihilation and creation. These portions of space are the Planck length of course. Empty space is a grid of connected plank length ‘space bars’ through which all kinds of fronts travel, not necessarily all. Most particles are much larger than a planck length, but the fronts in them have to be.
Maybe this is akin to string theory, but the string moves sideways to form a shape. We have more than one type of field, but those are just names for the same thing, energy, and energy is space coming into being. In a sense the big bang was a lot of space coming into being at a single moment, after which its network expanded and unfolded or unpacked over time. One may imagine it like a complex 3 dimensional web, of course the number of dimensions is limitless, and only depends on how many ‘bars’ a point allows. It may be just three, or only at some angle.
Light travels in an incredibly straight line, preserving images over unimaginable distances. This seems to defy the idea it is mediated by anything.
What is a photon really? What is moving through space at light speed? I say its space itself. A bunch of closely following ‘bars’ of space are punching through into new points which result in new space formed but in the exact direction the light travels in. What amazes me is the straightness of light as it travels in every direction. If there where some kind of fabric light had to travel by, like grid point or something, then light would not be spead equally in every direction even after traveling a billion years. We would observe interference bands from that grid. We don’t. Light is space/momentum/energy moving in exactly one direction and direction is not quantized. This property is why I think we are seeing creation of space itself.
The above also stems from the desire to materialize ‘fields’. A field is a very unsatisfactory concept, as if there is something else in which a particle moves around. An electric field for example. What is it. And we talk about attraction to distant electrodes. How can a distant electrode work on a particle. “through the field” is the answer, but what is the “field”. I think it is a local density of ‘bars’ and points of a specific type, such that a propagating particle surface/wavefront is diverted as it seeks to create and destroy its space/momentum.
The bars may represent entanglement, besides the bars and their creation and destruction there should be nothing else. There are no forces between bars, the bars creation and destruction and linking between endpoints of different bars mediate the forces.
Maybe the bars can have different lengths, so that creation and destruction also represents less energy. This then allows different types of fields. For now this is my thinking, or the general direction in which it is moving, and I rather think of space as a mutlidimentional recreating graph than as an canvas on which things are more or less ‘painted’. I also escape the uncertainty and the wave function kind of talk. A wave function is about what you might observe as you measure or interact with a particle. If you imagine a particle being a front of momentum of a specific shape and composition trying to propagate through emptiness, it becomes logical you can’t predict where you will find it. It becomes logical it might find a way to tunnel through things (as there is relatively a lot of empty (low energy) ‘space’). You may even imagine the probability of finding routes through the existing fabric.
So we know there is matter and anti matter, and if we combine them they annihilate and genereate a lot of radiation. These are two mirrored surfaces, pieces of space, momentum fronts so to say but with opposing structure, who’s densities can exactly inversely overlap. This then removes the directionality to the front and this causes it to radiate outward in all directions.
Often in discussing the universe and quantum theory position and time are said to be mutually exclusive. From the perspective of the universe as a mesh of vertexes/bars connecting nodes the concept of both position and time become meaningless. An atom or electron can only be described to be in an approximate region of the mesh but it will never stay where it is, and as the nodes in the mesh change ‘neighbours’ there is no knowing where it will show up.
The interaction with and realization of gravity is most interesting if you can decode it in these terms. A photon has mass and thus interacts with the gravitational field. We say ‘space is bend’ but how does this really work. Even if you imagine a flow towards masses, in which a photon gets caught, you are not explaining the real effect. If you take a photon to be a piece of ‘compressed space’ that is ‘evolving’ forward to mainting energy equilibrium while having perpendicular electric space which forces itself to rotate, and if you assume this process to occurs independently of all other space (where you don’t observe the photon) then perhaps the electromagnetic component needs to interact with the distortions caused by heavier matter and becomes bend by the relative abundance of bar types in one direction as opposed to another.
If you try to implement the basic laws of entropy in this ‘space-bar’ kind of view of the basic nature of reality, it makes sense to state that the energy in one bar always triest to become less. This means that between two points there can be one or several quanta of energy, and that a single bar (unconnected) will always become two bars or more if it has two or more quanta of energy. Of course the system is lossless, so at times in a mesh of bars the distribution of energy will be unbalanced, and radiation traveling between the mesh will end up being absorbed and dump a load of energy in a few bars that then have to dissipate it (creating space).
There needs to be an explanation for the containedness of energy in a photon though, unless we are looking at a bar that flips forward, then allows rotation of a perpendicular electic bar (or bars) then flips forward again, or something like that, a tubling angle unhindered by links to the mesh.
If energy translates to mass this may simply mean that it is able to fold the mesh into a separate space on ‘impact’. What that ‘impact’, meaning the transfer of energy from for instance a photon to the orbit of an electron really means or how it happens is not decided. You’d have to assume interaction between the energy in the photon and the energy in the electron orbital surface where one sets off a change in the other such that the electron orbital surface integrates bars in its (local separated) mesh so that the orbit diameter grows.
Gravitation may be explained by more radiation being present closer to masses, which means more bars are ‘recycling’ in the mesh and thus a more densly connected mesh. So the ‘under’ side of an object exists in a denser mesh than the top, and inside the object the mesh also becomes denser and this means traveling energy in the object (orbitals etc.) find their way into the denser mesh as they travel and find it harder to leave that denser mesh. This draws the object towards the denser meshed ‘space’.
It is true you can make formulas to describe the behavior of objects in space, Einstein did of course, but this does not explain the mechanism. Conversely, the ‘space-bar’ explanation of reality does not easily convert into a formulaic format.
There may be three types of bars (or more) that do not ‘stack’, but desire to remain perpedicular, or most remote from each other. This does hint at a repulsive or neutral force coming from the ‘energy’ stored in bars, which is kind of weak. The best way in my opinion would be to find an explanation without assuming any forces.
It could be that a configuration of ‘space-bars’ can form that is stabile and as a result space expands. Gravity that does not allow light to escape could be a vertex density that is so large it can instantaniously absorb all new bars light tries to create or it no longer allows for independent bars to be formed (all end up connected and thus the energy can not travel outward).