Ok, the concept here is simple: all things started with one elementary particle, and only one elementary particle has ever existed and that all things are made of this one particle. This particle, which you may call the "God" particle, (though not necessarily the same as the currently sought after "Higgs boson" particle) I'll name the "genesis" particle, to help differentiate from the others. This one particle has the ability to travel back and forth through time. A better way to think of it is that it can vibrate forwards and backwards through time. Now, suppose that initially this genesis particle existed for "x" amount of time. (Any amount of time could be used, I suppose... at least in the "early stage" of this theory. You can use one second, if that makes it easy to imagine.) In fact, better than that, we'll say that this unit of time of its existence is the most elementary unit of time possible. In other words, no other division of time is smaller (unless otherwise imaginary), just as no other particle could be more elementary. I'll call this unit of time a "bop." Now, suppose the genesis particle vibrated around and lasted for one bop. Then let's just say that it travels back in time by exactly one bop, and when it does, it "meets" the earlier version of itself. Next, the process repeats, and the two twin particles vibrate for one bop and then appear back in time by one bop, making four particles (which are all really just the same particle, just from different time frames, folded upon itself (in a nearby space.)
>Here's a crude drawing to represent what happens:
Imagine if you will, if you owned a telephone booth sized time machine. And you stood in front of it for a minute, and sort of wondered in a circle, before you decided to go in. When you enter, you emerge exactly one minute earlier in time, which means you find yourself standing in front of your one minute younger self. Now, imagine if the two of you repeated the same thing, so that there would be four of you.
Get the idea?
Now that initial step would repeat itself until the amount of matter grows to a critical point to where things start to interact with each other and perhaps some of those particles begin to clump together. The strangeness of this idea is that although all of the matter is really just the same particle, they begin to interact as if they are unique particles. Some continue to "duplicate" while other "rogue" particles clump together and form groups. These early groups would have formed the early ancestors to what we all know to be sub-atomic particles. Eventually this mass would have become very dense, and would have at that time initiated what we now refer to as the "Big Bang." The same physics from the that step on, as we've come to know them would then apply to the rest of the creation of the universe as we know it.
So there you have it. My theory of everything is that everything that you see is actually just one particle that continuously traveled back in time, which effectively duplicated itself in that instance of time, grew to a critical mass, enough to create the sub-atomic particles which began the universe that we all know today.
Now, you may wonder, why and how did I come up with this? Well, the answer is simple. I started off thinking about what it would be like to see yourself at an earlier state, by going back in time. Then I thought, if you could go back to see yourself in time, what would it be like if you had several of your future selves visit you? It would give the appearance of a growing mass. In fact, the amount of mass occupying that space would indeed have increased at that one instance in time. My next thoughts moved to, "what if that applied to just a single particle?" All of that led me to consider this a possibility however strange it may seem. Now granted, its a wild one, and its the type of thing that is born from late night, past-my-bedtime, type of thoughts. But then, think about it: What if this idea was possible and true? What would the implications be? What are your thoughts?
Great. We are the universe, both seen and unseen, the sinner and the saint, the lord and the servant. In other word, we exist in all forms in local awareness - the absolute being. And by that, the being that is capable to have absolute power without corrupting absolutely! That means we don't need the God, we just need to spread the power to everyone - the real absolute.
ReplyDeleteI signed up with the forum http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/ today and reposted my blog there. You can keep up with some of the discussion there.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/blogs/doug-mcmurray/26-origins-universe.html
Here's recent question:
Originally Posted by tom - (a site admin)
"Wouldnt your particle need to tend to go backwards in time more than forwards? if it would go backwards in time it could meet itself unless the other version of itself was forwards in time. Also are you saying that there is just one particle in the universe?"
My reply:
"That's a good thought. You could say that it has equal chances of going backwards or forwards through time. If you assumed that time itself has no beginning or end it could theoretically have gone backwards, prior to its existence, at which point its existence would have been recorded at earlier times (travel into negative time). This would suggest that there could be two universes based off of this, one in "positive time" and the other in "negative time".
The alternative way to look at this, is that there isn't a "negative" time. And that nothing, including time itself, could not have existed until this particle did.
In either case, the former seeming more likely in my mind than the latter, this assumes that for a moment the particle is somewhat stable enough to statistically come back on to itself. Now, as this process continued, it would have created enough copies of itself that it would have began to create a critical stage to where newer particles, let's call them "second particles" were formed based off of the original one (by clumping or interacting together.) It would have been this interaction that would have "slowed" it down and prevented the "second particles" from going back in time, thus creating a net gain.
For your final question, yes, I'm suggesting that everything you see is derived from just one particle, as weird as it seems."
Oobi - I just now "released" your comment, because I forgot that these are all moderated - and to check them. I will have to say, that I do disagree with you. There is one God, who created everything. So, all of my thoughts are not whether God exists, but how he did the creating.
ReplyDelete