Born to do Math 90 – Steady As She Goes
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Born To Do Math
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/10/01
[Beginning of recorded material]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is the current status of IC in terms of development?
Rick Rosner: The reason that a straight Big Bang universe can’t be a model for thought is that if the universe as experienced in a given moment – a given long moment with a moment of the universe being many hundreds of millions of years long – for that analogy with thought to apply then there would have to be some steadiness in the size and scale of the universe.
Because, by analogy with our brain, our minds process a limited range of information from moment-to-moment; that is, the amount of information in our brains at 10 o’clock is not different than at 1 o’clock or 3 o’clock – unless asleep – and so are humming along and dealing with the same amount of information dealing with different sorts of things.
If the universe is an information processing apparatus, you would expect provisions for steadiness within the operations of the universe; whereas, a Big Bang universe is unhomogenous over time. Science like homogeneity, similarity.
It is related, in some way, to Occam’s Razor. That you don’t want to set up special conditions to explain what is going on at any one time or any one space. The history of science has been getting away from specialness. That we started off as the center of the universe.
Then the Copernican system moved the Sun to the center, then further developments move us to an absolutely average galaxy to 10^11th galaxies in an unexceptional space. In that, all space that comes from a Big Bang is pretty much the same as any other place in space.
The Big Bang includes absolute spatial homogeneity. Space is the same every place, except in some places, have galaxies and some don’t. But the distribution of galaxies is homogenous. Things are the same through space.
The price you pay for spatial homogeneity is temporal complete specialness. Every moment is a time of the Big Bang is a unique point because the universe is always changing in size. But if the universe is an information processing apparatus, you would expect that there would be some steadiness from moment to moment in the universe.
That the universe can be the same size a billion years from now and a billion years ago, as it is now. For that to be true, you can’t have a strict Big Bang. We’re also assuming or guessing that the universe is much older than the apparent Big Bang age.
That means that there have to be ways to keep the universe lit. That is, you have to recycle galaxies or create new galaxies. There are some possibilities. You have to create new galaxies that will light up, burn out, and fall away – to be replaced by newer new galaxies.
Or you have to have a way for old galaxies to be relit, and/or you have to have a way for some galaxies to stay lit indefinitely for many, many hundreds of millions of years. By analogy with what happens in our brains or our minds, you would expect both.
You would expect some galaxies to stay lit. If galaxies are some information processing units, you would expect things like a language or perspective processing unit. You would expect that to be on whenever the universe is away or we’re awake.
We are always processing words. We are always looking at our surroundings through a perspective processing apparatus. We always orient ourselves in space via the part of our brains that turns what we see into 3-dimensional space.
We never, unless we’re doing acid or screw up these processes, see the structure space break down around us, so we never understand 3-dimensionality. There are other galaxies or other information processing units, memories, or whatever; that we would expect to cycle in and out as needed.
We need some physics that relights old galaxies, keeps some galaxies lit and lets you bring in new galaxies. That points at neutrino action in parts of the universe that have an extreme amount of gravitational curvature. That would be at the apparent beginning of the universe at T=0, and around blackish holes.
That something should happen around the parts of the universe with the greatest gravitational strain on space. That pulls fused matter apart. By fused matter, I mean neutron star stuff. I mean matter that has been fused into heavier and heavier elements.
There should be processes that rip this stuff apart back into more raw protons and electrons and lighter elements, which implies neutrino abosroption. Where a neutron gets hit or sucks a neutrino and then comes apart – I always get confused by neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, you need to have most processes in the non-extremely curved parts of the universe are fusion processes.
Lighter elements fuse together into heavier elements, turning protons plus electrons into neutrons. You need places in the universe where the reverse happens. Those places should be extremely curved places, as around blackish holes.
Hawking even talked about the matter being able to escape fully black holes because the strain on space adds enough energy to space around the event horizon that matter can be spontaneously created at the event horizon with matter duals popping out.
Like a piece of matter and its anti-matter counterpart spontaneously popping out of space right near the event horizon, one particle falls into the black hole and the other can struggle out of it. That is how black hole evaporation happens.
In IC, you do not have fully black holes. But you should be able to have similar stuff happen in, and around, the vicinity of black holes, where the matter gets torn apart and some stripped matter, some torn apart matter, that is not yet fused becomes available again to the, I would assume, rest of the galaxy.
Other processes include the strain on space allows for the tearing apart of matter that can allow for anti-neutrinos that are wiped out when a neutron is torn apart into a proton plus an electron. I would also assume those same parts of space are less transparent or more opaque, better able to absorb neutrinos, than less curved parts of space.
That neutrino fluxes, that pretty much every galaxy is a neutrino generator as normal matter fuses and as protons and electrons come together into neutrons releasing neutrinos; you would each galaxy to be a huge net producer of neutrinos because it is tough for normal matter to absorb them. I would guess that you’ve got these large filament structures in the galaxy.
Which, I assume, maintain relationships among longstanding structures in the universe of, specifically, galaxies and, perhaps, the filaments that they are a part of that stay lit for much longer than you’d expect a galaxy to stay lit, I would expect that you would have stable spatial relationships along these filaments with all the matter lined up along these filaments – to some extent focusing neutrino flux and keeping the galaxies lit and helping to maintain the spatial relationships, or the network or the filaments, longer than you would expect them to be maintained.
Jacobsen: That makes sense in two senses. One is the principle that larger structures tend to last long past a certain point. Similarly, two, small structures tend to last longer at a certain point.
Rosner: I agree with that. There is also the possibility that curved structures – the places where space is massively curved – as with the huge 1 million to a billion weight blackish holes at the center of galaxies. Those might act in a certain way like tent pegs or nails into the overall structure of the universe or the distribution of matter in the universe, where those are harder to move.
Those are more resistant to being pushed around gravitationally than smaller structures or less curvy/pointy structures because a gravitationally curved area is like a point or as a nail in a 4th gravitational dimension.
Those nails may hold the universe to a more set structure.
[End of recorded material]
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 