Tuesday, June 23, 2009

AWT and atemporal universe

In recent time the popularity of atemporal (timeless) Universe concept gained in similar way, like the popularity of emergence concept. This is not so surprising, because human understanding converges to Aether model rather quickly and both emergence, both atemporality belongs between important aspects of behavior of dense particle field. Such dense particle system is highly chaotic and atemporal and because no energy can propagate through it at distance, it can be considered "aspatial" as well. It simply has no meaning from causal perspective, as it behaves like empty void singularity with respect to energy and information spreading at distance. Unfortunately, just because various proponents of atemporal concept (J.A. Wheeler, D. Bohm, P. Yourgrau, Dennis A. Wright, J. Barbour's, P. Lynds, Ron Larther, Amrit S. Sorli and many others) didn't connected it with Aether concept explicitly, the concept of atemporality was left ignored by mainstream because of apparent lack of easy to follow (if any..) testable predictions (like the absence of global enthropy changes). Pure tautological idea without arrow of implicate logic isn't apparently enough even for positivistic approach of contemporary science from utilitarian reasons - no energy gradient has occured here.

In AWT the concept of time remains perfectly dual to concept of space. We can even imagine a hypothetical civilization, which would navigate through its dual Universe via time intervals mediated by longitudinal waves like bats - i.e. in dual way to human creatures, who are using space interval and transversal waves for such purpose (you can get the sample of bat clicking sound here). Therefore the concept of atemporal Universe is symmetric to concept of aspatial Universe and we can replace both of them by Aether concept easily without apparent lost of information.

This is because Aether concept still appears slightly more general, then the time or space concept and we can understand the relevance of particle nature of underwater for character of surface wave spreading even at the moment, when no surface wave can spread through it at all. This is because causal energy spreading in transversal waves isn't the only possible way of energy spreading and the longitudinal energy spreading is possible here, too. In addition, the concepts of both time, both space are rather abstract and derived from concept of particle environment like sand of water, which human mind has experienced first during its evolution. Therefore the water surface can serve as a good model for understanding of atemporal Universe concept. For example, we can imagine our space-time like 3D analogy of water surface, which we can observe via transversal surface waves only. What would we see on this surface?

At medium distance our view of 2D reality at water surface wouldn't differ very much from view of causal reality in 3D space. The so called capillary waves exhibit most pronounce transversal character of surface waves at 1.7 cm wavelength/distance scope and we can use them for explanation of relativity and Lorentz invariance concept in AWT. But at different dimensional scale our perspective would change radically.

At smaller distances the spreading of surface waves becomes dispersed into longitudinal waves by Brownian motion of water particles. These particles cannot be never seen by surface waves, because no object can serve both like subject, both like mean of observation at the same moment. But they still would lead to blurring of observable reality analogous to our observation of quantum phenomena at microscopic scale.

At the distant scale our view of reality would become analogous. As we know, only longitudinal waves can propagate at distance as so called gravity waves. It means, our vision of distant reality would become chaotic and blurry in the same way, like our observation of closest reality mediated by cosmic microwave background radiation. Gravity waves are related to vortices and tornados formation in fluids in analogous way, like gravitational waves in vacuum are related to black hole formation. Note that from exsintric perspective gravity waves remain tranversal ones in the same way, like capillary waves remains transversal from insintric perspective. We can met with 2D/3D version of T-duality and AdS/CFT correspondence in wave spreading here and because we can observe all artifacts in dual way, we can use water surface model for easy to understand prediction/explanation of quantum uncertainty principle. Note that the symmetry of longitudinal wave scale is violated toward longer wavelength even in logaritmic scale (compare the celerity curve for water above) - and we can use it for prediction/explanation of accelerated Universe expansion and CPT symmetry violation from particle simulation of space-time brane gradients as well.

Believe it or not, such view would change radically our understanding of cosmology at large scales. It would mean, our Universe is basically infinite and atemporal both at large, both at small scales and no real evolution or enthropy arrow occurs here. It would mean, what we can see in Hubble ultra deep field is not the formation of first galaxies in dark ages - it's just a foggy boundary of our part of Universe. It would mean, remote galaxies are widespread into infinity - we just cannot see them clearly. We can compare such view to the observation of landscape under haze. From distance every distant place appears blurry and foggy, although we can still believe, it would appear rather clear and transparent from local perspective. Every distant observer at the boundary of visible Universe would see our part of Universe from distant past in the similar manner, which we can experience in ultra deep Hubble field by now.

I do believe, the true motivation of atemporal Universe concept exist in a deep relativeness of observational perspective - but from AWT perspective this perspective isn't quite general, because it's dual to local perspective, which is indeed temporal and it has no meaning to generalize it for human observer, because we could not survive and/or exchange information in atemporal Universe anyway. Just the replacement of naked eye by devices enables us to interact with it vicariously. So we can always ask, which perspective may be more relevant for us - the remote abstract perspective dedicated to human intuition, which enables us understand and generalize - or the deeply local perspective represented by causal logics and formal math, which enables us to concretize and describe exactly the neighboring reality? From this perspective the atemporal Aether concept remains dual to fractal nested geometrodynamic concept - while the former one is still way way more palatable for human mind. We can still think, why is it so...

For me the most surprising aspect of AWT isn't the Aether concept itself - but a fact, nobody did ever attempted to think in such straightforward way. The common disbelief in Aether concept made people completely blind for dual vision of reality for long years. This should serve as a sufficient warning for human civilization: no matter how advanced it becomes, it may still remain quite primitive and short-seeing at certain level of thinking.


Ciudadano Kane said...

I'm completely incapable of understanding an Universe without time or without space. Maybe, I'm very limited to understand so odd stuff.

Zephir said...

Me too and this may be reason, why nobody derived some meaningful prediction(s) from these ideas.

But we can still imagine underwater, which is an atemporal/aspatial analogy of local space-time, formed by water surface and we can understand the way, in which atemporal environment affects energy spreading through observable space by particle system analogies.

Ciudadano Kane said...


You wrote,

Believe it or not, such view would change radically our understanding of cosmology at large scales. It would mean, our Universe is basically infinite and atemporal both at large, both at small scales and no real evolution or enthropy arrow occurs here.

Does it mean that the Big Bang ever existed?
But, the Big Bang model has been accepted by almost all the members of the mainstream community. I want to say that any physicist, who belongs to the academia, isn't going to endorse such statement. In this occasion, I should disagree with you, too. Because the Big Bang model is very plausible according with the astronomical observations. So, I don't think what you wrote was correct. Sorry, but I do not believe. Although, I have to admit that my thoughts may be wrong, so, I hope that you are not upset for my comment. If you don't like it, please, feel free to delete it.

Zephir said...

Why I should delete your post? Big Bang isn't still generally accepted. In recent time the theories of periodic Universe are gaining popularity, for example. From general perspective Big Bang correspond timeless and spaceless concept of Universe in it's very beginning.

From AWT perspective appears probable, observable Universe is formed by interior of black hole, which forms single node in space-time foam, which appear quite regular in small scope, so that even periodic Universe concept may become relevant here. But at large distance scale every trace of regularity disappear and our Universe would appear timeless and spaceless. It's all about relativity in observational perspective.

Zephir said...

The main question, we are expected to solve here is, whether dark matter foam is the foam of galaxies and their black holes, which I'm talking about - or whether some other, even much general structure is observable for us behind it.

It means, whether black holes which are forming the core of most galaxies are containing daughter Universes comparable to out Universe - or whether they contain only some lightweight versions of our Universe. Can even mass and gravity disappear inside of black hole? For me it's quite probable, at least temporarily - and this temporal perspective may remain quite long, in fact.

But currently I don't see any robust logical perspective supporting or denying such view.

Ciudadano Kane said...

Then, Is the Big Bang predicted by AWT ?

Zephir said...

If Aether would be completely homogeneous, we could see anything from it. Aether must remain inhomogeneous to be able to spread energy at distance. Such inhomogeneities would lead to dispersion of energy in less or more distant perspective in the similar way, like dispersion of waves at water surface. Such dispersion we could call a Big Bang from insintric perspective, because it appears like look into singularity from remote perspective.

Zephir said...

Time and the Block Universe According to the block universe model, every moment in time is equally real, so the whole of space and time must be laid-out in one unchanging spacetime block

Zephir said...

Incidentally, a Czech philosopher and the chairman of Mensa Czechoslovakia and Miss Internet Czech Republic Mr. Jan Fikáček has hypothesized that we only use the speed of light in special relativity because we prefer the vision over hearing. Blind people, he argued, would probably prefer to use the relativity of sound instead in which "c" stands for the speed of sound. Unfortunately, this independently thinking colleague of ours has not explained whether the blind people are allowed to use supersonic airplanes.