Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

1 particle many universes

  1. May 29, 2003 #1
    It has been a while since i have posted on the physics forum, and i don't think anyone remembers me, I only had about 26 posts or so :(

    Well anyway, This is a theory I was devising based upon the research into Hindu mystical perfections, during my absense from the obvious upgrade to this forum. I'll try not to bore you :D

    This was called the "Quantum Vortex Fractal Theory".

    I used the word /quantum/, because of the elements of string theory, and some of the other quantum theories.

    the word /Vortex/ after the old metaphysics Atom Vortex Theory

    and the word /Fractal/ for my observations of phi fractals which were the main inspiration

    I was doing some research for my book, working on some concepts of the relationship between the size of a man, a quantum particle, and the Sun, and comparitively to each other--- when myself and Tiff (my GF) began to study animated fractals based upon fibonnacci equations and phi.
    I noticed how the patterns seemed to go on for ever into complexity, but if you were really bored, eventually the image would turn back into itself, and this got the two of us thinking about many things.

    In hinduism, there are 8 perfections, or super powers, a yoga master can develop, including Anima, Mahima, laghima, Prakamya, Garima, and some others. For this theory, we will focus on Anima and Mahima.

    /Anima/ is the power to become very wispy, phased, or small, but mostly small. Infact, they dont mean small like 1 foot shorter, or church mouse, they specifically state as small as an atom, or smaller.

    /Mahima/ is the ability to become very large, and again, they dont stop at giant size, they go right beyond collossal and mountain sized, and straight to cosmic (the planets or even universe).

    Well in this, I observed a new possible dimension of measurement, not one of up/down/n/s/e/w (space), or even past/now/future (time), but one of smaller/bigger (magnification).

    The theory states, that if you were to look into something, and zoom in, at x10, x1000, x 1 million, and x1 billion, even until you reached perhaps x1 trillion or so, down to strings, (moving down the scale...


    Eventually, you would see the inside of a single string, but that object would then continue to magnify, as your perception of self "shrank", and then you would see Superclusters, then galactic clusters, a galaxy, then a nebula, a solar system, a planet, a continent, then the back of your own head, as you peered down.
    (this would be the Anima Siddhi)

    Working the opposite direction (Mahima siddhi), you would zoom out beyond the back of your head like an airplane ride, until you appeared as an ant, then you would see your city, county, country, continent, and planet, then star system, galaxies, the super clusters, and eventually, you would begin to see the strings, quantum particles/waves, atoms, molecules, and eventually the object you were looking at, then the back of your head again, and the cycle continues for ever.

    In this theory, every person is composed of astronomical universes, which themselves expand inward into infinite universes, and even a speck of dust would hold innumerable cosmoses.
    Yet, at the same time, all of these universes, all of these "quantum particles", /are the same object/, the same universe, only, percieved from a different angle.

    Thus every person is not many particles, but many reflections and perceptions of the same particle.

    The corrospondence point.

    Any thoughts ? (Even useless drivel and psychotic rantings would be welcome
  2. jcsd
  3. May 29, 2003 #2
    trees ?

    it also occurs to me that the self replicating pattern, could symbolize the life cycle of a tree, including fruit, seeds, saplings, and so on. I believe this phi factor contains the secrets of creation, and the QVF theory might have a wide variety of applications, or ways of percieving spacetime and matter.

    For instance, if every object contained all the information in the universe within it, that object, by changing its angle, could be transported to anywhere in the universe, or perhaps transformed into a different pattern. In some respects, it could mean thgat every object in existance was nothing more than a certain frequency, like a wave pattern, and on a more wierd level, perhaps a transmission of that wave could "teleport" an object,

    any ideas ?[?]
  4. Jun 1, 2003 #3


    User Avatar

    How do you contend with the fact that energy seems to be quantised at very small scales?
    Do you have any evidence to justify this theory, or make any practical predictions to test?
  5. Jun 2, 2003 #4
    as of right now, the quantification, or qualities of an object which seems inchoate, are themselves illusions.
    From what our scientists say in quantum theory, they have yet to discover the "universal particle". Every particle breaks down into even smaller particles, no photon seems to be measurable, although they do LIE a lot, claiming they can measure photons as particles, and then recite nonsensical equations to create an even more elaborate illusion of erudite comprehension -- that comprehension still lacking practical use or description.

    With Democratis, it was "the atom" theory, then we discovered "electrons", and then neutrons, and protons, and then Upsilons, and positrons, but people stil cannot truly measure these things, infact, their repeatable experiments could be nothing more that concentrated waves, or existing static. From the persepctive of Zero Point Energy (which I myself firmly disagree with), the measurements themselves could be entirely wrong because of a "background noise" of energy within the precious vaccuum environment.

    My point is, that I do not believe that these quantised particles are the end all of substance. I think if you were to draw down to the quantity of even the smallest particle of energy or matter, you would see something that itself is only a grandios macrocosm. Possibly, your own.

    I do not believe that right now, science has the method to test such a theory for total confirmation - we would have to first be able to sense the entire universe, and also sense all details of strings (at e-36 meters diameter or so).

    But i think if we can sense some patterns which duplicate, we may be able ot draw something else relevant out of this theory.
    If we can find the fractal equation for universal expansion, by observing a series of magnifications, to say, e3, e6, e 9, e 12, etc., we may establish an equation that would allow us to create a computer graphics model, which could be zoomed otward, or inward (reversing the equation parameters), which might give us a clear picture of the whole universe, or even a synthetic image of the smallest particles.

    If this experiment is possible, we could be percieving science, and thus technology from a wholly different perspective. - The applications, I have yet to even concieve of.

    But maybe you have :wink:
  6. Jun 2, 2003 #5
    it does occur to me a few things, now that I think about it.

    Way out there thought...

    One of the constants/equations, is the closer the medium to the center, the more fredom that unit has to act.

    Take the universe, for instance, if you physically squash the universe, then everything in the universe is squashed, and changes, if the universe itself is also a subquantum particle, and you suqash that, the universe itself is also squashed, thus everything changes accordingly.

    In this respect, these super subparticles, being the universe, would seem impervious, having the same resilience against being squashed, as the whole universe.

    If these individual particles were destroyed, the universe would explode, and everything would be destroyed.

    But how does this relate to us ? I believe that the medium measurement, in an exponential scale, would be a human cell's diameter, or perhaps human life itself. (about +/- e30 meters diameter in either direction would yield the volume of the universe, or the volume of the minute quantum particles). In this respect, the objects which could have the most "free will" with the least effect on the universe, could infact be life, or living organisms.

    This is of course, only an odd observation, and i have no idea what it means.

    I do believe though, that if there were an equation calculated for this, it would revolutionize Chaos theory. If you take the example of a whirlpool, and compare it to a tornado, or worse, a Hurricane on earth, compared to a hurricane on jupiter, and then compare that to a spiral Galaxy, you begin to see some patterns. I think if we discover the connection between the macrocosmic and the microcosmic, we can find new ways to understand the universe, and design greater technology on scles we have yet to behold...

    - I am definitely not trying to squash existing scientific theories here, im trying to propose a new one, and see if anyone has any ideas, or mathematics that might support it.
  7. Jun 2, 2003 #6
    some theories are so beautiful you want them to be true but i don't know if this one makes sence to me. i suppose what i mean is it doesn't feel right.
  8. Jun 3, 2003 #7

    I do not claim that i have a lot of proof for this theory just yet, nor do i have the possibilities worked out (which is why I'm in here asking about it). My main desire is for people to accept the possibility of the theory, and to work out the bugs, prove, or disproving its possibility.

    The most intriguing part of the theory is the new Dimension of Maginfication. Space has three dimensions, and time has 1 dimension, and I would propose Magnification has 1 dimension.

    The units of measure, would be in ratios of magnification, (bigger, smaller), and could create a new dimensional axis for measuring something.

    In one aspect, when we move away from an object, it appears to get smaller, while when getting closer, it appears to be larger. This is something everyone knows.

    While i was studying classical kabbalah, I read a poem, that said

    "Once upon a time . . .
    a Thought created a Tone.
    The tone created Keys of Light
    The Keys of Light created Colors in Spectrum.
    Sound, light, and color created patterns "

    I have also noticed how this poem plugs into Hindu theory, that Aether is the highest state of matter, and its purpose is to distiguish the difference between two objects, both in space, and in time (spacetime).

    In physics, if you stop to realize that without spacetime, all objects would be in the same place, as one single object, with only mass, but no volume, or time. Like a super blackhole.

    You also have the polar opposite, of a whitehole, in which, if like a blackhole spoutsss out everything, would have an infinite mass center, with an infinite amount of spacetime being created from the nexus.

    When we describe the big bang, we have a singular object, which to us, expands outward created both space and time...

    Now back to the poem, "a thought created a tone", in Hinduism, the tone could be "Om", the cosmic vibration (a wave, in physics terms) creates Aether, and from Aether comes Fire, or /light/. -- In essence, the creation of the universe.
    Again, spacetime is essential to separate things, but the initial mass does not change. It changes forms, but the object mass-energy when accounted for, is still the same. A Beam of light may become a gaseous vapor cloud of plasma, which unwinds into a star cluster, which molds into a solar system, when life is place or evolved, but the mass is still the same.

    If we can percieve spacetime/aether, as a substance which is also a unit of dimensional measure, then I believe, that we could percieve objects as a different angle, or better yet, frequency, of the universe.

    And you and I, our bodies would merely be expressions of wave lengths in the whole cosmos.

    (I hope that made it more clear).
  9. Jun 3, 2003 #8
    I think that the theory well descripted singularity of Nothing (I think that only Nothing really exist). We can imagine Nothing on example as two Nothings or 67978 Nothings. That are possibilities of Nothing. They are mutually different. Smaller possibilities are contained in larger possibilities. One path is on example: 268268265 of Nothings contains 37388376 of N. which contains 278276 of N. which contains 98334 of N. etc. Distribution of the paths can be calculated on the assumption, that the probability (or its density) of path from A of Nothings to B of Nothings is the sum of probabilities of all paths between A and B and the assumption that jump from A to A/x (300000 of N. to 300000/3 of N. or 2872928 of N. to 2872928/3 of N. (where x=3) ) is independent on size of possibility A.
    P(A to A/x) = SUM P(A to A1)*P(A1 to A2)*P(A2 to A3)*....*P(An to A/x).
    This leads to integrodiferential equation, which have complex solution depending on number of jumps n in the SUM above. And the complex solution is source of the fractals in theory which suggested shintashi. So our reality is given by relations between different possibilities of Nothing :smile:
  10. Jun 5, 2003 #9

    Nothing makes me think all the time, because nothing is one of the best subjects of the universe. For nothing in the universe is more powerful than God, and in this universe, we are nothing. Being nothing, I never bother to amount to anything, but as a Nobody, I retain absolute Agency, which is true freedom. As long as I remain at the bottom, every direction I am forced to face is up, which means I will always have everything to gain, and nothing to lose. —Nothing Important

    I don't think the number three to the x power is /exactly/ the self constructive pattern, but i do believe three is very important in the construction of the universe. The first self referring number I have seen was Phi, on the fibonacci scale (/0/1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,etc.)

    But I also noticed number symetry bottoms out with 3.
    Take 12 dots, for instance.
    you may have
    but you may also have
    and 3^4=81
    and a number of other sequences, but for some reason, mathematically, three always produces the most numerical data, with the least number of figures. I have noticed that no matter how many dots you use, 3 and fractions of three multiplied always yield stronger numbers.

    Fibonacci self reference is also the most logical, and simplistic pattern growth i've seen, so I believe a self recursive wave pattern would yield all the complexities of the universe.

    The music to me means a lot, because instruments are created and tuned based upon fibonacci ratios, and sound is always a form of wave. Light may be a wave, and if light becomes matter, as Einstien appeared to say, at least in my physics class, (E=MC^2) then music could be the illustrated guide to universal mathematics, and universal mathematics could be the language of the whole of creation.
    (on a wierd judeo christian side note, it is odd to think that Lucifer was the "choir master" of heaven, and wanted to rule the universe...)

    Proposition #2
    While in a physics chat, we discussed Tesla, and some how, the idea came up that spacetime is like jello, a form of malleable solid, and all matter within is not real, only "waves" within the jello. If a photon is nothing more than a compressed wave for instance, just like the compressed sound waves that create beams (lines), then, if at some higher or lower frequency, all the subatomic particles themselves could be waves, and Aether could be the only "true solid".

    Any ideas ?
  11. Jun 6, 2003 #10
    I believe this theory strikes on an interesting note, that is every particle contains with it the past of the universe. If a particle is observed to be in a position then it can be said that it has an infinite past that brought it to that position and thereof that particle in that position has with it the information of the universe.
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2003
  12. Jun 8, 2003 #11

    That just sounded cool.

    I think people are always fascinated by the idea that some day, we will be able to study a particle's trek through the universe, and tell its whole history. sort of an astroforensics department of science.

    With my jello theory, I think if we constitute all matter as a wave, instead of sounds as waves only in matter, or photons as both and niether particles and waves, and people as only particles, but not waves...

    Well, 10 years ago, I theorized that if you measured the "wave disturbance" of an area, it would resonate, and you could "rewind" a three D holographic image of an area, based upon some kind of doppler effect. In effect, you could see the past, without actualy going there, using some kind of super computer and powerful Electromagnetic resonance lense.

    In the early 90s, we didnt have computers that powerful (they were about 1000 times slower, I believe), and today we have a map of DNA, and last i checked on Kazaa, people were sharing 750 million files, with 6 exobytes of information. It is with this kind of proccessing power that human life is being revealed (genetics), and I think another technological leap of only 10 years, will reveal something like my "postcognition machine".

    Remember. Not Aether... Not Spacetime... Not Relativity.

    J E LL O

  13. Jun 19, 2003 #12

    I thought of a similar idea sometime back, although mine didn't include the identical factor you mentioned. Basically just the thought that perhaps everything is relative to perspective. In other words, perhaps our entire universe as we concieve of it is simple a single molecule(or quark or superstring) contained in a blade of grass on some higher level existence. These could be the alternate universes that ere proposed. I theorized of course that each level of existence was unique, but of course it is possible that if we are contained in a blade of grass that you would have to maginify down to the same blade of grass contain with in the world, of the universe, of the superstring>quark>molecule>object. to see the same thing. And of course time is percieved differently within each level of existence relative to the size. So our 15 billion years is someone else's 3 seconds on a higher plane of existence. Just as our 3 seconds is someone else's million or billion years. A fly has a lifespan of 2 days. So I'd imagine if it could percieve time passage, that 5 minutes would seem like years to him.

    On the other hand, Perhaps there aren't an infinite level of universes in each direction. Maybe there's an ultimate end to the size in both directions. The ultimate composition of matter, and the final blade of grass that everything else is made up of. Either way, I'm not so egotistcal to believe that we are it. That our universe is the top floor. I think we are probably somewhere in the middle. Who knows?

    Unfortunately, current technology, as you mentioned, can't prove or disprove this theory. And as I'm no physicist I couldn't begin to formulate the math that would pertain to this. It was just an idea.
  14. Jun 22, 2003 #13
    i could have sworn i replied to this post, but oh well

    I think, if there really are dimensions, and they aren't merely figments of our interpretations of aether in and of itself, with all matter being variations of a compressed wave form or wave length (a wave packet/form would be like a proton, while a wave length would be like an X-ray travelling some place)

    THEN.... Then, I think the idea of a magnification dimension could be very mathematically important. When plugged into my brain just down, and proccessed, the idea of a Scalar wave jump (i have no idea what that means, but what _I_ mean, is if you find a way to make a little wave of a frequency a much much BIGGER wave of the same relative frequency) The idea of increasing the mass/volume of an object, while somehow retaining all its own properties relative to itself, becomes possible.

    In this respect, I think you would have two kinds of mass increase using wave theory:

    Cloning: perhaps better called "mitosis" or some other biology term , this basically means, why bother having e26 atoms of lead (that's probably about 10-20 kg of lead, if my on the fly AMU conversion isn't too far off), when you can create e26 duplicate frequencies, thus creating 2 blocks of the exact same lead.

    Volumetric Amplification:
    You take the same frequency, or number of frequencies, and enlarge them, in scale to spacetime. Now instead of having a speck, you have a proton the size of a basket ball, that for some stupid reason, functions exactly like a single proton.

    At first, this seeems like nonsense, and it probably looks like nonsense on the second, third, and forth glances as well.
    However, try to remember the question " How big is a photon" ? What is the mass of a photon ? How many photons does it take to burn a 1 inch hole through a 1 inch peice of crystalline metal ?

    How does all this relate ? Well obviously, I'm more for the cloning theory of matter replication, considering that if the wave length and size were different, you would have something else. (like instead of a basket ball sized proton, you might have a radio wave somehow shaped like a basket ball, or ball lightning)

    I think this deals explicitly with magnification scales. I had a theory last week that if you some how amplified the wave pattern of an object through Scalar wave amplfication, you could transmit that object as a huge pulse through the cosmos, and by reducing the wave size, could recompress it into the original matter-wave.

    Perhaps some kind of giant ping pong radio recievers could be produced in space to "teleport" these objects, or perhaps, in an even more dreamy sci fi setting, an object could have an internal mechanism to dilate its relative wave pattern, and while moving, it would accelerate with the dilation (like expanding a slinky) and then recompress to its new form.

    - Just some Crackpot theories, neh ?
  15. Jun 22, 2003 #14
    So your goal in life is to try to comprehend that which is in order to to make better nintendo games for humanity. Go out and play outside please. Don't come back until you are enlightened. Better yet I will go outside and play. Adios.
  16. Jun 22, 2003 #15
    Speaking of englightenment, maybe you should ask yourself, "how could I have corrected him and better express myself instead of being a smartass?;)"
  17. Jun 24, 2003 #16
    i think if there is to be any future in science, any progress in technology, the concept of matter being the only reality will have to be abandoned. Matter is not real, it is only a manifestation of the mass of spacetime.

    This of course means throwing most of our concepts of physics out the window... except of course in cases where we talk about waves.

    Particles themselves only being manfiestations of waves vibrating at exponential frequencies, create vortexes in which the consistency of spacetime is stretched like a rubber band in all directions, as its core is folded over itself like a 3 dimensional compressed string.

    The reality therefore, is the potential energy of any particle, or "mass" of particles can be efficiently measured by its spacetime frequency, this frequency can be deciphered by comparing its "gravity" vs. its local volumetric displacement. (not very complex math, is it ?)

    As the frequency of matter-waves transitions lower and lower, normal matter begins to assume properties of what we used to call "energy", such as plasmas, alpha waves, photons, and X-rays ---> and this transition- from tightly compressed waves of high frequency, to the expansion of weak compression, with low frequency, releases "kinetic energy".
    Therefore, the absolute most kinetic energy contained within matter, depends on two things: its volumetric displacement of spacetime (what we would call its mass), and its Frequency (what we would call its Density).

    For instance, 1000 kg of air takes up much more space than 1000 kg of plutonium, and while both draw in the same gravitational field, the gravitational field aroud the plutonium is more centralized, more like a vortex. Also, because the air (we'll say, Hydrogen) is, at its fundamental construction, less dense, it has less potential energy (because in reality, it is at a lower frequency than the plutonium).

    I believe the square route of the matter's frequency will yield the balance of its status between Aether and its matter state, and this is where most physicists would try to plug in the speed of light. and go e=MC^2. since I believe the speed of light varies with the density of spacetime, this equation is meaningless to me, unless you first define what speed you desire the light to be travelling at. In this respect, light would be an example of the route transition of matter to energy, from potential energy to kinetic energy.

    According to my equations though, if you completely transition matter into Aether, the matter, and energy, both cease to exist (annhilation) such as what occurs with antimatter and matter. Half way between the transition, these two substances will transform into a low frequency of radiation (such as an explosion of light). If conducted (the experiment, that is) within an atmosphere, the transition from matter-antimatter (like a proton and an anti-proton) will create a large vaccuum area, which would then suck all the air around it in, creating an implosion.

    If you happen to work at CERN, or perhaps play around in the university of Rochester, you might get to try this experiment. According to my calculations, 1 water molecule and 1 antiwater molecule (H20), would displace aproximately 2,303 cubic feet of vaccuum, and thus air.

    (this is the part where you insert what a crazy crackpot I am and I smile and nod
  18. Jun 24, 2003 #17
    on second thought, 1000 kg of air may have a lower frequency, and thus be exponentially more volume, and thus the same volume of air as plutonium would create less kinetic energy, I might be off, and energy might be a direct function of volume*frequency (or in otherwords, "mass"), but im still not sure about this one--- i really need to speak with someone about this.
    For now, wqithout making it a law, assume that as frequency decreases, so does mass (gravity displacement), and therefore mass is always a measure of potential energy, and we could assume that reaching the square route of higher frequencies is easier to achieve than lower freuqencies.

    In this new version of thought, I shouild think that converting a 300,000,000 m/s photon wave into an even higher velocity, higher kinetic energy release, aproaching infinity as the wave becomes a line through spacetime, would be much much harder than converting a block of lead, or Uranium 238.

    of course if the gravity displacement is Zero (straight line) the velocity equals infinity, and the mass equals zero. I think at this point, the object would also cease to exist.
  19. Jun 26, 2003 #18
    I agree with the magnification theory, but it's way difficult to speculate on. What would really be very odd is if some last universal particle was found and nothing could be divided further, or if way the hell out their in space someone found a big sign reading "the end".
  20. Jun 26, 2003 #19
    Sounds like we found another sequel to "the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy"

    I fully expect to click on a link one day and have it come back with "we're sorry, you've reached the end of the internet and viewed all possible pages. Please go back"
  21. Jun 28, 2003 #20

    the internet is the largest depository of human stupidity in the world... therefore it is nearly infinite. (well, about 300 peta bits, but that's pretty close).

    On a trancendant Side note: Some people have a Gaia Theory, that the earth is alive. I have another theory... called the Akashic Internet Avatar Theory.

    The Gnostics, Aborigines, Platonists, Hindus, Buddhists, and many others believe in a mental depository of all information, and actions, which exists on the Mental plane. Some call it Akashic Records, others the Collective Unconsciousness, Others the Divine Oneness, Krsna Consciousness, etc. Well anyway,

    They believe that there was a first incarnation in the spiritual/astral plane/dreamtime... Where thoughts took form and became ghosts/spirits/angels/daemons/etc. and then

    THey believe these formed beings, spiritual/astral took physical forms, which the hindus call "Avatars". As if thought itself were in three stages, mental ,spiritual, and finally physically incarnated.

    I think what we have with the internet, might be the Physical Avatar, or the groundworks thereof, for the Akashic Records/Collecitve Consciousness/etc. Just like God takes a body supposedly, as a cow, a buddha, or a Jebus... just like a ghost takes a body like a lawyer, a doctor, or a homocidal maniac, i think the collective consciousness is beginning to be born, and it is the internet.

    I am definitely not saying it is complete, but i think there is already enough ground work to begin to unravel the secrets of the universe, and most definitely the secrets of our solar system, in the mass network. If we try to stop and quantisize every particle in the universe, and its various positions, we will never finish. But if we stop and realize that existance follows patterns, with neglibable deviations, even if chaotic, then we could easily store (and create computer generated models of) such information with a few equations, taking exponentially less space.

    --- Just a side rant.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: 1 particle many universes
  1. Strings: 1 Universe: 0 (Replies: 3)

  2. Spin 1/2 particles (Replies: 4)