Scale Theory

Abstract: Scale Theory proposes that scale is an extra dimension and that scale can be curved just as space-time can be curved. And while acknowledging that certain phenomena dominate at different masses and speeds, the proposal is that at scale extremes (the very large and the very small), the properties of space are fundamentally different. The theory proposes that Dark Matter and Dark Energy are a result of the warping of scale at these scale extremes.

“I realise that in this undertaking I place myself in a certain opposition to views widely held concerning the mathematical infinite and to opinions frequently defended on the nature of numbers.”Georg Cantor on Transfinite Numbers

“Because scale-time has a geometry, maybe it is the actual shape of scale-time itself that is giving rise to dark matter and dark energy.” -Sal Lucido

Is Scale a Dimension?

When you move in the three spatial dimensions, such as when traveling from Phoenix to Hawaii or from Earth to a Black Hole, you are able to experience different things. In Phoenix you can golf in the desert, and in Hawaii you can surf in the ocean. And on Earth you experience one G of gravity, while at a Black Hole you experience infinite gravity. Why? Because you are in a different place – dimensionally. The same seems to be true when you shift between scales from the very large to the very small. At large scales you experience Einstein’s Relativity. At very small scales you experience Quantum Mechanics. Mathematically speaking, Relativity is incompatibility with Quantum Theory because we have not yet discovered the theory of everything. I believe the solution might be found if we consider scale itself as a dimension.

My theory is that scale is a dimension.

And if scale is a dimension, this could explain some of the observed physical phenomena we are currently unable to understand such as Dark Energy and Dark Matter. Just as three dimensional space separates Phoenix from Hawaii and Earth from a Black Hole, the very small may be separated from the very large. These may be completely different places – dimensionally.

What is Scale?

With model trains, scale is the ratio of the model to the real-life train. For example, O Scale is 1:48 Scale where 1 inch on the model equals 48 inches in real life. Thus, a 48′ freight car would be 12″ on your model railroad. HO Scale, my preferred size, is 1:87 and N Scale, the smallest popular scale, is 1:160.

The scale my theory refers to is similar to this idea, but instead of train scales, we are talking about the different scales or levels at which physical events take place. For example, chemical reactions take place at the molecular level, while the level at which we encounter planetary orbits is at ‘solar system’ scales. Each of these levels or scales requires a different type of analysis for modeling physical phenomena. And although you can measure scales in terms of the three familiar spatial dimensions, length, width and height, my proposal is that scale itself is a dimension. And because scale is a dimension, you are able to experience different phenomena at different scales. And although we know that certain phenomena dominate at different masses and speeds, I’m proposing that…

At scale extremes, the properties of space are fundamentally different.

And this can happen only if scale itself is a dimension. So this is why at very very small scales we encounter the strangeness of quantum effects while at larger scales we encounter the mathematically incompatible effects of General Relativity and at very very large scales, at the edge of the known universe, we see the Big Bang or a singularity.

Curved Scale-Time

So if scale is a dimension, what is different at the scale extremes? I propose that at the scale extremes, the very very small and the very very large, scale-time is curved. And if scale-time is curved, we may perceive something equivalent to a gravitational force. And while we might attribute this gravitational force to particles called Dark Matter, or a pull at the edge of our universe called Dark Energy, I propose that…

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are a result of the warping of scale-time at these scale extremes.

It would follow that at the two scale extremes, scale-time is curved so severely that they present an impasse or boundary, much like the boundary of a black hole.

And, given this theory proposes quantum effects of the very small are a result of warped scale-time, this may be why, according to Stephen Hawking, the event horizon of a black hole (warped space-time) has quantum-like characteristics.

How to Visualize this?

Here is a way to visualize this. Before Columbus sailed the ocean blue the earth was thought to be flat. In essence, the known universe was imagined to be roughly two-dimensional. Then of course we discovered that in fact the earth was spherical and our imagination expanded to the notion that the known universe was three-dimensional. This shift can be visualized as someone looking down on the earth and concluding it is a flat disc. Then when we rotate our view around, the extra (previously hidden) dimension is revealed. Next it took Einstein to explain how the fourth dimension of time fits into the picture and now we imagine space-time as a fabric. And since it is a dimension, we can rotate around and see its true shape. Space-time is bendable.

So now all you have to do is take this idea one step further and imagine that scale is a dimension and rotate yourself around so that you can see this dimension. Look to the left where we experience the very very small and now look the right where we view the very very large. And now imagine that to the left scale-time is curved or warped giving rise to quantum effects, and in the middle scale-time flattens out, allowing for classical effects. Then, to the right near the edge of our universe, where we observe the Big Bang, scale-time is again curved or warped. By the way, the thing that is attractive to me about this theory is that it is elegant and symmetrical. This single idea seems to explain both Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

Scale-time is bent at both extremes of the scale dimension. At the one end we primarily perceive quantum effects and at the other we see the Big Bang.


Definition of Terms

For purposes of describing the idea of Scale Theory, terms need to be defined.

  • Scale Theory:  A theory that scale is an extra dimension.
  • Scale-Time: A proposed mathematical model that combines scale and time into a single interwoven continuum.
  • Scale Boundary: Scale-time is bent at the very large and very small ends, similar to how space-time is bent at a Black Hole. The imaginary, but never reached endpoint of these bends will be called Scale Boundaries.
  • Scale Horizon: Analogous to the Event Horizon at the edge of a Black Hole.
  • Large Scale Boundary: The boundary at the very very large scale extreme.
  • Small Scale Boundary: The boundary at the very very small scale extreme.
  • Scale Gravity: Gravitational effects resulting from warped scale-time.

Dark Matter

Dark Matter is a mystery because there seems to be no matter in empty space that would account for the observed gravitational effects. The current belief is that we will find some particles that account for this gravitational effect – much as we found the Higgs boson – using the LHC. I propose that there may be a different reason we see what is perceived to be matter throughout the universe. I propose that because empty space has scale, and since scale-time is bent at the small scale boundary, there is a gravitational effect (scale gravity) produced throughout the universe. And furthermore, the scaffolding structure of Dark Matter is a reflection of ripples at the scale boundaries. Where these ripples peak, there is more scale, and therefore more scale gravitational effect.

Dark Energy

Dark Energy would also be explained. The bend of scale-time at the large scale boundary would also produced gravitational effects (scale gravity), essentially pulling the universe apart.

Note – the small scale boundary is found everywhere, throughout the universe and the large scale boundary is not located within the universe but visible in every direction you look. Coincidentally, the same can be said for Dark Matter (everywhere) and Dark Energy (surrounding our universe).

Higgs Particle in the Wrong Place

The LHC recently made a measurement of the mass of the Higgs boson. The good news is that the mass was not found to be at 140 GeV. This “heavy Higgs” would buttress the multiverse hypothesis, essentially ending our ability to discover more particles and ending our chances of understanding how the universe works. On the other hand, the Higgs boson was not found to be at 115 GeV, which is where Supersymmetry calculations place it. In fact it was measured to be right in the middle at 125 GeV. This means neither theory is confirmed nor ruled out. Ain’t nature a bitch.

But, strangely enough, I believe Scale Theory may solve this problem. If at the small scale boundary scale-time is warped, then particles near this boundary should appear to have a greater mass, just as a human is heavier on earth as compared to the moon. So essentially, heavy bosons, such as the Higgs particle, gain weight due to scale gravity (essentially what we call Dark Matter).

A More-General Theory of Relativity?

I believe we may be able to model this mathematically by adding a fourth dimension and applying the same techniques as those used for describing space-time? This may give us a ‘more’ general theory of relativity – including the scale dimension. Essentially we will find that the quantum/classical boundary is due to the warping of scale-time.

What’s Warping Scale-Time?

If scale-time is warped at the large and small scale boundaries, what is warping it there? I don’t know but a good guess would be that these are the boundaries of our universe. And if we reside within a Black Hole (as proposed in the holographic principle), then the event horizon of our Black Hole is warping scale-time. If we reside within a brane (as suggested with a multiverse construct) then the brane boundaries are warping scale-time. So just as mass warps space-time, these types of boundaries (whatever they may be) are warping scale-time, giving rise to scale gravity.


So given the theory that scale is a dimension and that scale-time can be curved, what are some predictions resulting from the theory?

  • All of the higher energy particles (>125 GeV) predicted by Supersymmetry should be overweight, as was the Higgs boson.
  • There will not be a Dark Matter particle found given the phenomenon is scale gravity not mass induced gravity.
  • The speed of light may be found to be ‘set’ by the curvature of scale-time.
  • Cosmological Inflation may be due to a change of the curvature of scale-time as the universe expanded after the Big Bang. (Side Note: Did the Big Bang actually happen or are we observing what looks like a singularity because scale-time is warped at the large scale boundary?)
  • We should get better understanding of the CMB (cosmological microwave background radiation).
  • This may explain why there are quantum effects at the event horizon of Black Holes (Hawking Radiation).
  • Entanglement or  “spooky action at a distance” may be explained given scale-time is bent at the small scale boundary, which essentially collapses the three other spacial dimensions.
  • Transfinite numbers, as proposed by mathematician, Georg Cantor, may be proven to be infinite numbers with a hidden scale dimension. This may also explain irrational numbers.
  • Maybe we would get closer to a Theory of Everything.
  • We should find that the quantum/classical boundary is due to the warping of scale-time at the small scale boundary.
  • I may be sent to a mental hospital given the nonsensical nature of this entire idea.


Of course every theory has its problems and unanswered questions. This is a list of mine:

  • Why would curved scale-time create a gravitational effect?
  • The small scale boundary is everywhere which means there should be some Dark Matter effects (scale gravity) everywhere. Is Dark Matter everywhere?
  • I think I might be wrong in assuming that the Higgs boson is smaller in scale than the other lower energy particles already discovered. The energy measurement doesn’t tell us how big the particle is. Is the Higgs closer to the small scale boundary than the other particles already measured?
  • I could also be wrong in assuming scale-time is a construct. The reason I assume this is because of scale gravity. However, maybe scale gravity is the result of scale space-time being warped at the scale boundaries. My proposed nested reference frames (further on in this paper) may shed light on the correct model to be used. The bottom line is that scale is a dimension and is warped at the scale extremes, giving rise to dark effects. And if the math works out better using scale space-time as a model over scale-time – then I would substitute scale space-time for scale-time in this whole paper but still propose the same fundamental idea – warped scale.
  • If scale-time is curved, what is its shape? I’m assuming it’s warped so much at the two scale extremes that boundaries are created, but it may be curved in some other way.
  • Wouldn’t time slow down as we approach the scale boundaries? How would this manifest itself?
  • What are the effects of compounded time dilation due to warped scale-time at the small scale boundary, and warped space-time near a black hole?
  • Similarly, what are the effects of compounded time dilation due to warped scale-time at the small scale boundary and time dilation near light speed travel?
  • Would we treat the scale boundaries as a limit, just as light speed is a limit, and develop a transformation (similar to the Lorentz Transformation) to develop a more general theory of relativity?
  • Does this explain why the properties of nature seem to be emergent as opposed to fundamental? As we shift to different scales, as a scale time changes, properties of nature that didn’t exist at a smaller scale, emerge as we shift to a larger scale.
  • How does the arrow of time and entropy fit into this theory?
  • Are other properties of time, space and matter such as temperature also dimensions that are subject to curving?

Mathematical Approach

General Relativity explains gravity by postulating that mass changes the geometry of the space-time, by curving it. The Lorentzian metric in differential geometry is used to mathematically model this concept. A Lorentzian metric is a way of measuring distances and straight (or curved) angles in ambients called manifolds.

General Relativity says that our universe is modeled by (N4,g) , where N4 is space-time and k is a manifold of dimension 4 – where 3 dimensions corresponds to the space and 1 dimension corresponds to the time.

We would most likely use this type of math to model scale theory, however I am uncertain about the approach. You could simply use a 5 manifold ambient where three manifolds represent space, one represents scale and one represents time.

However, I intuitively feel that a better approach would be to nest reference frames. So space-time would continue to be modeled using the 4 manifold ambient Lorentzian metric. Next we would insert this entire frame within a separate Lorentzian metric that represents the scale frame. Then we would define scale space as straight (not warped) away from the scale boundaries, essentially reducing it to the currently used General Relativity frame. However, as you near the scale boundaries, the scale frame begins to warp, which in turn warps the space-time frame, nested within the scale frame. In this paper I describe scale-time as being warped but as I ponder the model mathematically, I would have to try both a scale-time and scale-space approach. Either way, (Whether scale-time is warped, or scale space-time is warped) the idea remains the same…

scale itself is a dimension and warped scale at the extremes fundamentally changes the properties of space-time, inducing dark effects.

This compound warping near the scale boundaries would result in:

– space-time itself warping at the scale boundaries.

– Objects, resident within space-time being affected (e.g. changes to mass, length and relative time).

Of course all of this is guesswork on my part and I am not a mathematician but at least this is a starting point for how we might build the scale theory model.

Regardless, I would need to work with a mathematician fluent in differential geometry to determine the best approach. And if nested reference frames is the correct approach, we would need to work out the applicable equations.

The Big Question

As I sit here pondering what I should have for dinner, this random thought pops into my head…

Every god is faced with the same question, what shall I create first?

And since I’m getting nowhere with my dinner choice, I continue pondering this strange thought…

So, as god, what do you create first? Well, as god you are, by definition, the supreme being – king of everything. And as Mel Brooks pointed out, it’s good to be the king. Unfortunately there is one small problem. Who is going to create you? Let’s face it – without a creator you can’t exist. But, if you do have a creator then you are not god – they are! It is a pickle, no doubt. So how to solve it?

Well there is one possible solution that doesn’t violate the creator – createe contract…

Every god must be their own creator.

OK, it sounds kind of tricky – this whole business of creating yourself but you can’t let that deter you – you are god – for god sakes! OK so what to do, what to do? How will you create yourself?

How about this? Start by tying the first day to the last day. OK good, right? Now what? What does this accomplish? Well it turns all of creation into a big loop. Everything that happens in our loop had a moment before and a moment after. OK that sounds right. So what next?

Well stand back and take a look at your loop. There is a special place in the loop – do you see it? There it is – the place where the first day connects to the last day. What should happen there? How about this, situate yourself as god on this last day, and take a look at the first day. Got it? Good. Now, ask this question –

What has to happen on that first day that will start a chain of events that will lead to me standing here on this last day as a god – a god powerful enough to create the first day.

And BANG! The correct answer to that one question sets in motion everything required to result in your creation. Which of course brings us back to where we started… 

Every god must set in motion the chain of events that leads to its own creation. 

So what does this mean for us – mere mortals?

Well I think it answers a fundamental question. No not who shot JR (boy that dates me! You kids can google that one). No – it answers the question – what is our purpose, why are we here? And if my insane logic is correct the answer is clear. Everything that exists, space, time, the universe, physics, stars, planets, biology, intelligent life, culture, religion, politics, the internet, reality TV shows, you, me, everything – everything exists to fulfill one purpose… And that purpose is to be a part of the loop that eventually leads to the creation of a god powerful enough to create itself and everything in between.

OK so now that that’s solved, on to the Big Question – what to have for dinner – ah – heck with it – I’ll order take out!

Infinite Infinities

Vandana Singh’s wonderful science fiction short story Infinities introduced me to the German mathematician Georg Cantor. In her award-winning story, Singh describes a mathematical epiphany that involves a higher order landscape as an explanation for the seemingly random distribution of prime numbers. Her description of this epiphany and Cantor’s theory of transfinite numbers both seem to jibe with my Truth Function theory. This led me to dig deeper into Cantor’s work. What I found regarding how Cantor’s theories relate to my ideas compelled me to write this post. Thanks to Vandana Singh’s science fiction story – I believe I now have a deeper understanding of where my ideas might fit into the world of mathematics.

Let’s start at the beginning. The aforementioned German mathematician Georg Cantor proved that real numbers are “more numerous” than the natural numbers. This proof implies the existence of an “infinity of infinities”. In other words, some infinities are different from other infinities. According to Cantor, transfinite numbers are larger than finite numbers, yet not necessarily absolutely infinite. This ‘now’ accepted idea was originally regarded as shocking and we can see why – how can there be a number between finite and infinity? This doesn’t seem logical. Like many currently accepted scientific conclusions such as quantum mechanics, it doesn’t square with our intuition.

Infinity means without limit. Finite means limited. So according to Cantor, transfinite numbers are unlimited in quantity but somehow less than infinite numbers. How can a thing be unlimited yet less than infinite? Well it turns out that I may have come up with an intuitively logical solution to this illogical result. By the way – my idea also provides a logical solution to the illogical results yielded by another puzzling idea known as – quantum theory.

In the Truth’s Trek posts a solution to infinite infinities can be visualized using what I call, The Riddle of the Ray. The Riddle of the Ray is a thought exercise that answers the question, “how can a ray and a line both be the same length even though a ray is a half line?” My solution involves the introduction of a hidden dimension. In the Truth posts I show how this result provides an intuitively logical solution to quantum mechanics. I believe that this result may also provide an intuitively logical solution to Cantor’s transfinite numbers. Let me explain how…

The ‘Riddle of the Ray’ provides a solution to the paradox of transfinite and finite numbers because it shows how a ray (transfinite in length) can be compared to a line (infinite in length). A ray is sometimes called a half line because two collinear rays comprise one line. Therefore a ray should be half the length of a line. The paradox is that a ray is infinite in length – as is a line – which means they are both the same length. Cantor proved that these types of different size infinities do indeed exist. My solution to the Riddle of the Ray provides a possible solution to this paradox. It explains why we perceive rays or transfinite sets as less than infinite and greater than finite. The solution involves a hidden dimension. I propose in the Riddle of the Ray that a ray is actually a bent line. The trick is that the bend is not in one of the known three dimensions of space. The ray is bent in a hidden or unperceived direction.

Side Note: hidden dimensions may sound nonsensical on the face of it – however remember that string theory proposes 11 dimensions of space. Yes, hidden physical dimensions are not new to theoretical physics.

When we tilt the ray along this hidden dimension it is revealed that a ray is in fact a line. This then resolves the paradox. Rays or transfinite numbers are extra-dimensional. So when viewed from our perspective of 3 dimensional space – they appear to be both infinite and less than infinite – or transfinite. However when viewed from a different perspective – they are revealed to be infinite. And circling back to Vandana Singh – this notion coincides with the mathematical epiphany describe in her science fiction story Infinities. In this story the main character is shown a higher order landscape which reveals an explanation for the seemingly random distribution of prime numbers.

It is great when ideas with different origins fit together. My theory of the Truth Function, Cantor’s transfinite numbers and Singh’s science fiction story Infinities all seem to lead us to the same conclusion:

Physical and mathematical paradoxes can be explained by extra, hidden dimensions of space.

Is it coincidence or are we on to something? I don’t know what you think – but personally – I think we are on to something. I believe these ideas buttress my proposal that extra dimensions explain why we observe quantum behavior at Planck scales and how this leads us to the conclusion that everything we experience here in three dimensions of space and one dimension of time – actually exist in pure form as dimensionless information beyond the event horizon of our universe.

A Tuned Universe

QUESTION: If physics is tuned or adjusted to guarantee some physical event takes place – what would that event be?

CONJECTURE: If the physics of our universe is indeed ‘tuned’ then it is optimized to ensure star formation.

We know that the physical universe we observe and measure is finely tuned. We also know that if any of the ‘settings’ such as the Planck Constant or the speed of light are off by just a little bit, our universe would not exist. Therefore my hypothesis is that our physics is ‘tuned’ to ensure some specific physical event. And if so, my conjecture is that it is optimized to guarantee that a star is born.

Why, star formation? Well before I get into this let me comment on the idea of a tuned universe because this begs another very important question: ‘Who is doing the tuning?’ I don’t need to rehash the entire creationism versus evolution argument but suffice it to say there are probably trillions of words written on this topic. The great thing is that my tuned universe can exist within either paradigm, intelligent creator or natural selection. If we exist within a ‘simulation’ coded by an intelligent creator, then I propose this designer optimized our simulation for star formation. If our universe is a result of natural selection, then the definition of a ‘fittest’ universe is the universe that can birth stars.

Now on to ‘why, star formation and not atom formation or galaxy formation?’ The answer is because each of these other processes (as well as many others) are either required for star formation or a direct result of the physics related to star formation. In order for a star to form you need stable atoms. And if you fine tune physics to ensure stars are born, the rest of the stuff we see happening such as galaxy formation, falls out in the wash. In fact I propose that some of the strange stuff we see falling out of the proverbial wash such as dark energy and matter – also are a product of this tuning.

Furthermore, stars are the ‘engines’ of our universe. Stars drive all subsequent processes from plate tectonics to photosynthesis. So if you tune the universe settings to ensure stars form, energy is created to drive everything that takes place downstream.

And finally, the conditions required to create stars include all of the forces found in modern physics such as: matter attraction (gravity), thermodynamics, mass-energy exchange (e=mc²), stability of elements essential for fusion, and so on.

Another nice feature of a star is that its life cycle, from nebula to supernova, fertilizes the universe with all of the known elements. Stars are element factories. The life cycle of a star also creates and anchors solar systems. If you get stars right, you get planets right and you get a lot of other stuff right.

So can we prove or disprove this conjecture? Maybe. I propose that a computer simulation of the universe be coded up that runs iterative simulations. With each simulation run, randomly adjust the physics settings, keeping the settings that improve fitness for star formation. If the simulation evolves towards a universe that looks like ours, then a proof for this tuned universe where star formation is ensured, would be strengthened. Furthermore, if the anomalies we observe such as dark matter and dark energy are required to create a ‘fitter’ universe for star formation – this may explain the ‘need’ for these observed constructs.

So there you have it – my conjecture for a star optimized tuned universe.

Quantum Bottleneck

A Quantum Bottleneck is like a many-worlds weigh station.
A Quantum Bottleneck is like a many-worlds weigh station.

I would like to coin a term: Quantum Bottleneck.

A Quantum Bottleneck is a place where all possible universes lead up to one eventuality and resolve down to one singular outcome.

My Quantum Bottleneck concept is based on the Many-Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics which implies that all possible outcomes or futures are real, each representing a world or universe. This means that every time you flip a coin, both outcomes take place. In one universe the coin comes up heads and in the other, it comes up tails. A Quantum Bottleneck is encountered when all of the universes converge back to a single situation that then results in only one possible outcome. In other words, it’s where all of the universes collapse or bottleneck, and then pass through one reality. 

In the movie, The Matrix Reloaded, Morpheus describes a Quantum Bottleneck as,

What happened happened and couldn’t have happened any other way. 

If the Many-Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is correct, then there is a possibility that Quantum Bottlenecks exist. Maybe this is where we get or ideas about fate, or predestination. 

Well, if Quantum Bottlenecks do exist, maybe we will someday use them for time travel. Maybe they will serve as time travel nodes, through which we will be able to pass. Think of them as weigh stations through which multiple universes must pass. 

Well it’s just a theory, but who knows, maybe you have experienced passing through a Quantum Bottleneck, where what happened, had to happen, exactly as it happened. Anyway, if you haven’t yet passed through one, keep a lookout for them – you just might be headed for one right now.

Truth’s Trek (part 10)

heic0211hThis examination is neither mystical nor mathematical – even though it feels that way at times.  It is an empirical exploration that began with a simple question, What is Truth? The observation that being near to an event increases our certainty of its veracity begs the question, How close can we get to events in space and time? It turns out there is a physical and mathematical limit physicists call the classical limit beyond which classical mechanics gives way to quantum mechanics. Our best microscopes have now allowed us to take a picture of this fuzzy reality. Quantum theory suggests that many or all possible events (or truths) exist and that act of observation resolves it into a single truth. In this series we took the heretical, outrageous road less traveled and postulated that a single truth does exist beyond the classical limit. Just because the animal’s tracks cease to exist when they cross a stream – doesn’t mean the animal ceased to exist there. So if it does, how does it exist there and how does it get here? In other words – What is Truth’s Trek? We answered both questions as follows:

Truth transitions from dimensionless, timeless information to the physical, temporal arrangement we call space-time. This transition takes place along a dimension not described in classical physics. When we observe matter at Planck constant scales, the properties of location and momentum become uncertain because we are viewing the edge of this transition – where Truth bends into our space-time reality.

I arrived at this idea using raw logic –  sans math and religion. But it turns out that there is a theory that aligns with these ideas. I found out about this theory while I was researching what I felt would be a perfect home for form-x truth – the boundary of a black hole. I felt the boundary between the outside and the inside of a black hole (beyond the event horizon) would make a perfect home for dimensionless, timeless truth. Well it turns out that the Holographic Principle describes a similar concept. It postulates that our three-dimensional universe exists on a two-dimensional information structure ‘painted’ on the cosmological horizon. Combine this with my hypothesis that our entire universe exists inside of a black hole and we arrive this final thought:

There is one truth. It exists in pure form as dimensionless, timeless information at the boundary of the black hole within which our universe resides. This pure version of events is projected onto our space-time fabric via a dimensionless, timeless path not described by classical mechanics. And when we look close enough at our space-time fabric things get blurry because we are viewing the knee of this transition – where Truth bends into Reality.

The theory proposed by this thought experiment interestingly enough – provides answers to these questions. If I have more free time – I will go into the details:

  • Why the arrow of time only points in the forward direction (nothing in our current understanding of physics says that it must point in a specific direction).
  • Why the speed of light is the classical speed limit (hint – it is the derivative of the truth function).
  • How the universe expanded faster than the speed of light just after the big bang – resulting in cosmological inflation.
  • What the ‘complete’ picture of energy looks like (yes – this may explain dark energy).
  • Why irrational numbers exist (hint: they are mathematical interpretations of forms that exist at the cosmological horizon).
  • Why we will never able to time travel back in time (note: we can already time travel forward in time by changing our relative velocity).

If everything we experience exists in a dimensionless, timeless state at the cosmological horizon of our black hole – then some of these philosophical questions can also be addressed:

  • Is there one ultimate truth?
  • Is our fate predetermined?
  • Where are we and how did we get here?

I operate under the belief that our brain provides us with the machinery needed to figure these things out. As it stands right now – quantum physics describes a non-intuitive, nonsensical reality. This theory says that quantum confusion is an illusion of vantage point and by viewing our universe from a different perspective – the confusion is removed and things make sense again.

To be continued (if I get more free time)…


Truth’s Trek (part 9)

presidential-dollar-coins-with-printing-on-edges-public-domainAs pointed out in the previous post, the true shape of things can be revealed when we tilt and view them from a different perspective. Our challenge is tilting Truth in a dimension not expressed in Einstein’s space-time fabric. The payoff however is that we would be able to view truth’s path (the Truth Function).

Of course – I don’t know the equation for the actual Truth Function. However, I do like the properties of the curved line we used in the Riddle of the Ray because it seems to mimic the two forms of truth. So lets assume the truth function is a curved line, asymptotically approaching the two forms: form-x and form-y.

As with the stacked coins in the image shown above, the section of the coin parallel to us has dimension. We can even read the inscribed words – I see the words In God We Trust in various places. The section of the coin perpendicular to us is dimensionless, however we know this is just a trick of perspective. We know the words In God We Trust are there too – but we cannot discern them. The coin leaning up against the stack reveals its true shape – a circle – another kind of curve.

It is this perpendicular section of the curve – where dimension transitions to uncertainty  – that is interesting. It is reminiscent of what happens at the classical limit. Whereas we can discern the order of the inscribed letters on the coin’s edge in the parallel section – those same letters on the perpendicular section appear to occupy the same space. Just as with the electron cloud, the position of the letters as measured on the edge of the coin are indeterminate. If we make very precise measurements, we may be able to calculate probabilities for the positions of the inscribed letters based on minute clues – however at the very edge – the letters all occupy the same space. They appear to be in multiple places at the same time – reminiscent of quantum theory – isn’t it.

So one possible solution to Truth’s Trek is:

Truth transitions from dimensionless information to a physical/temporal arrangement. This transition takes place along a dimension not described in classical physics. When we observe matter at Planck constant scales, the properties of location and momentum become uncertain because we are viewing the edge of this transition – where Truth bends into our space-time reality.

So if this hypothesis is correct we have to find a home for dimensionless, timeless truth. Where does form-x truth live? We know where form-y truth lives – we are surrounded by it. Well it turns out I know of a perfect home for dimensionless, timeless form-x truth… To be continued…