Breaking It All Down - The Process of Creation

[Principium Nexus]

Let's go straight at it, where did it all begin, how did it create and where is it heading?

The modern science paradigm speaks of the big bang, a singular point in space and time with infinite density. This point contained everything, all matter and energy that is present in today's universe is from this beginning. In principle the big bang contained every event ever to happen but all happening in the same moment, then the inflection point was reached where all these events began to separate, this gave rise to time and space itself.

Read that again, everything that will ever happen already existed, all in the same moment, but these events are distending from each other since the big bang. Is this the red shift that scientists speak of? The fading of all energy and eventually time itself will cease to exist or get infinitely small? In scientific terms they would call this the heat death of the universe, everything will separate so much form each other in all directions that the energy density in the infinite future would near zero or fade to exist. Without change, without increasing entropy time itself will stop to exist.

So let's go to our basic view of the big bang.

 

At I, we see the singularity in all it's glory, infinitely small, dense, containing all that is and will ever be!

At II, the big bang has began (what caused it for now is a mystery, something outside of our physical time and universe). The expansion is happening in a constant rate towards all spatial dimension. Physically we can observe the three axis (X,Y,Z) they are present in this very moment and create our 3D world with length,width and depth. I assume this happens in all directions in the same rate and from a logical stand point the sphere is the most balanced shape we have. We see this everywhere in space, all forces are equally balanced, there is no preference towards any particular point in any direction.

The exact moment after the big bang looked schematically looked like II and it does look exactly the same now, but where does it expand into? Is there even a thing to grow into or are we not growing but turning inside out. Yes, this is a completely new concept but this would be the idea of a cyclical universe, the universe is growing into itself from itself, like a torus turning inside out, being perfectly balanced and having no real edge but itself and the absolute starting point of it all, the singularity. Whoaa, space is folding in upon itself, let that settle for a while and think about the implications.

If you were traveling on the edge of this sphere what would you see? It's not nothingness, you will not see any edge, you will only see more space filled with stars. The edge of the universe is the now! Why because this is where the future is still unwritten, but looking back we can see into the past and the origin where we came from. In this exact moment you are experiencing all of reality at the edge, don't think of it as something spatial, think of it as time. You are surfing on this expanding bubble into the future. Why can't we see into the future then? If we are on the edge we should be able to look back into the past (heat map of the universe) but also into the future? In some sense we already can with our minds, but not physically while looking into the skies of the universe. The light arriving to us has already happened and is looking into a frame of the past, but we cannot find such frame of the future.

We could argue that looking into the past is actually looking into the future, because all the logical consequences that follow are derived from the past, so we can only know the future by looking at the past. Are the future and the past then the same thing, possibly.

As we can see in this model which is much more logically sound and satisfying in my opinion the universe is a balanced place, it looks the same as every smaller fractal of itself in the cosmos. We see this toroidal shape EVERYWHERE, it's the basic shape that arises in any form of electro-magnetism and charges that flow.

Now depending on your position in this relativistic shape where we float on, everyone see a different point of view in time, but they are all following the same path and to be completely accurate there is no separation in any of those events. The end and the beginning are the same for every event in space and time that will ever happen, again and again. Seeing the equilibrium point as our origin/singularity or the big bang also explains that time from our observable frame could have existed beyond what we can see from our physical universe. The time before the big bang is still part of the same process that create the new universe or passing through the eye of the singularity.

This is what we want and what is the most logical, a continuous universe, if it exists now it will in the infinite future. It has always existed and will always exist.

The big question that arises is if there was any first cycle, what was before this? My personal view is nothing, the universe really is a gift, the grandest of all. 

[Neo]

The universe exists in your mind and you exist in the universe simultaneously. We don't have a word for this. Maybe a symbol which is ouroboros (appeared in one of Leo's videos). The universe depends on observation to exist and we depend on the existence of the universe to exist and observe it. This concept doesn't really have a place in scientific explanation that you are looking to nail down.

[Principium Nexus]

@Neo That's what I was trying to get at in my next post, that the physical observation and the mental interpretation of reality itself are one and the same. All the empirical findings we do are qualities of the "physical world" but this physical world only lives as a concept in the mind. What if those qualities we find are actually telling us more over how the mind works than the "physical outside world".

Relativity and time are not outside there, no they are created in the mind, and understanding how these relations arise is knowing the matrix of mind.

So this concept what I just applied to the "physical" universe actually applies to the mind too. How does relativity arise and in turn give rise to identity and reference frame of the observer?

[Principium Nexus]

@Leo Gura Check this out. https://www.quora.com/Is-the-universe-likely-to-be-shaped-like-a-torus

[cirkussmile]

You have a miracle in your calculations but you seem to put that aside and try to explain it anyway

 

It's impossible to comprehend ?

[Faceless]

The question should be what is the motive for wanting to know such a question/answer 

Whats this all about? Why do you want to know? 

These types of questions interest me more personally. 

Good luck?

Edited March 7, 2018 by Faceless

[dorg]

I like what Jed McKenna said about this:

Quote

 

Scientists first theorized the atom and attendant molecules. Then they set out to prove it and did indeed appear to find them. Then they went on to sub-atomic particles ... with names that sound like they were created whilst on a stoner in Vegas... maybe they where.

And, it goes on, and on and on. But what I think very few have realize (beside that brilliant scientist, Dr. Mckenna... oohh.. could it be me or Terrance   ) that all these where not created during the Big Bang, which is another fairy tale for the masses, these have all been created by the scientists themselves. They theorize, they created and then they discover... oh yeh,   and then they seek more money with which they can create more particles. Your labor and taxes contribute to this, of course.   .

 

There were emojis in this but did not survive the copy and paste from http://jedmckenna.createaforum.com/new-board/jed-rant-cut-to-the-chase/msg26182/#msg26182