Friday, December 09, 2005
What was God doing before the Big Bang?
are not as free as you wish,
to pose your hypotheticals,
(unless as pure Zen).
To paraphrase Bill Clinton:
It depends on what the meaning
of "is", is.
The succession of evolutionary eras, different in kind, is the key to envisioning
the universe in toto, start to finish.
Although the same physical laws apply throughout, the emergence of subdomains,
stuck states (potential energy reservoirs), and the interactions of
partial freezing cause later, more entropically ensnared episodes
to have the simplistic underlying physics masked, sapped of directness,
and stored in macro pockets of often daunting complexity.
When a small macro architecture (snippet) becomes potentialized in a mixed phase slurry,
molecular adherences driven by simple static valence attraction can empower
partial phase change domain spreading both enabled by, attracted to, and reproducing
the randomly formed architecture.
Brownian motion is the driver, and yet the localized charge regime in the presence of
the architectural snippet(s) will deform brownian random pathwalks into an apparency
It has arisen randomly. Yet certain arrangements potentialize aggregation more strongly,
and are predominantly reproduced. Had one a counter-entropic hyper-vision, one might
posit a time prior to emergence, when a true mathematical calculation of possible
forms would undoubtedly produce forms that did arise. However, that is not
possible to human scientists at this time. Only the imagining of it, as a model.
However, the near-infinite set of initial conditions precludes a rigorous model at this time,
with the calculational resources available.
Suffice it to say that a correct list of initials, with a correct application of pure physics,
could have no alternate result other than what has actually occurred.
The prior statement, taking no liberties with statistical probability, is equivalent to stating
that the universe, in its initial femtosecond of existence,
contained the attractor determining its final outcome.
Such time-local randomness as is available for speculative inspection may therefore
be termed local, apparent-full-random , in a many-order-of-magnitude-smaller subset
of a globally determined attracted-random universe.
The global attractor , present at time-birth, will of needs be a unity.
It is obvious that a spatial, temporal, physical unity, as was
the random quantum wave anomaly causing reality's emergence,
contained , at that instant, no subsets.
So where have we gone, and what do we have?
The entire post-big-bang universe has been subsiding locally,
even as it has expanded globally.
All local phenomena, anomaly formation, matter's coalescence,
galactic aggregation, star ignition, nuclear transmogrification,
planetary collection, litho, atmo, bio, no-o sphere coalescence,
all are subsidance phenomena.
We are now, and always have been, freezing.
But not a simple freezing, as it turns out.
The almost infinitely varied interaction of mixed phase
crystallization ocurring in all local domains
has as its own global character, the nature of a slurry.
The more mobile, energetic, and gas-like phenomena,
such as light, or neutrino flux,
pervading a space inhabited by less energetic clumped regimes,
responding to the mobiles either weakly (in the open) or strongly
(in the clumps), with gravitic/entropic rundown the be all and end all.
Once the first neutron married the first electron,
Once universal transparency emerged,
The simplicity of creation had ended.
Complexification had arisen.
The arc is fully determined.
The local will vary, and can wriggle in its chains,
But not much.
The attractor cannot now be computed, as we have stated above.
Trapped in Einsteinian locality, all investigators to date
lack a sufficient ladder to peek out of the well.
The collection of all-wavelength cosmic maps,
and the building of advanced accellerators must be pursued,
lest we not have our best possible dataset.
Here is hoping my little realization provides a mental rung or two.
While trapped in a potential energy well
can an investigator detect, compute, or reveal
the global attractor?
My own answer would be that nothing ought to prevent it.
However a sufficient sample set, sufficiently distributed,
would be difficult to devise and collect.
My advice is, start working on it now.
While trapped in the Einstein local
ought cosmologists despair of discerning globalities?
Heisenberg notwithstanding, it appears from inside my life,
the most imperative of imperatives, the nature of my nature,
and I advise its continuance, despite personal blindness,
as an ethical mandate, intuitively apprehended.
Because alternative aggregations are easily envisioned,
and partially computable, the existence of reality-bias is proven.
With no bias, all possible permutations would exist in equal portion.
Yet some easily envisioned states and particles have no exemplars.
The logical conclusion is inescapable.
Reality is biased.
Physics is attracted.
The attractor is a unity.
The universal attractor imparts bias throughout all subdomains,
creating in some cases, skewed randomness, an apparency of purpose.
Except in mental models, it cannot be evaded.
In the fashioning of mental models, one might envision
a new physics, embrace all the non-emergent permutations,
unconnect phenomena which are connected in reality,
and therefore fail as modeler, with no apparent consequence,
except isolation from the actual.
The fashioner of isolated, unconnected models,
deceptively seductive in mock completeness, is an enemy of science.
Science is apolitical, we do not model in order to convince.
We model in order to understand.
The misuse of the modelers knife to convince is a perversion of craft,
in pursuit of the partial, the delusional, the dead end of rhetoric,
and ought to be avoided.
What must also be avoided in conscience is the use
of simplistic cartoon reductions of highly conditional realities,
on audiences unable to discriminate reduction from original.
We may dazzle rubes at will, once we abandon this ethic,
and yet it is not the rube corps to whom we owe allegiance,
but rather , the existent all, approachable from our stupidity well,
only by minds of greatest purity,
at occasional moments of greatest clarity.
of my original post
would prob'ly be helpful:
Imagine that the universe
is a goodyear tire,
lying on its side,
creating time by turning.
(The word "GOODYEAR"
is embossed, as usual,
on the tire wall.)
Imagine that the letter "G"
is the big bang,
and that the letter "R"
is the final big crunch,
and we live
between the first and second "O" .
we can barely make out the "G",
and can't see forward.
sitting near "O", asks us:
"What was God doing
before the big bang?"
Spinning the wheel, dummy.
Consequently no moment of creation.
The Big Bang? Fred Hoyle coined this term & he was being funny. I call it lovingly The Big Crap.