Rocky Mtn. Compost News
The New Spiritual Wonders
Onyx for President
FirstStart, L.L.C.

External Links
Science &Technology

Louie Takes On God and the Big Bang Theory

- Feature Story -


How Did The Big Bang Go?

Dec, 2004

It wasn't Louie's fault that he had a brain that could contemplate much of the Universe without effort. It also wasn't Louie's fault that his brain was caged within the goofy body of a mini-lop rabbit, but such a brain scarcely notices such a body except as a distraction, in any case.

Another distraction was Bonny. Bonny was a strikingly beautiful silver-blue bunny with the mental aptitude of a tissue paper, and besides being a constant nuisance, her pretty fur was always floating around or left in piles in the dark corners where Louie hid to work out physical laws of the universe in peaceful seclusion.

This is worthy of note because nobody seems to consider what effort someone took to just think for a bit without fur flying up their nose when they created the laws of motion, invented calculus, created the General Theory or, in Louie's case, solved the Big Bang riddle.

Really, Newton was probably OK, but who else can just goof off long enough to snooze outdoors until, in a fit of late-summer's productivity, an apple tree boinks one on his skull, and then he is so unfettered with paying phone bills and such that he can stay there and work out the gravity thing until it's sorted out? And how about relativity? Everyone already knew that energy=mass*velocity squared, so what's the big deal about declaring velocity to be light speed? Newton dealt with things that go about the speed of a falling apple while Einstein thought "outside the box." Anyhow, both fellows had the wherewithall to just think about things instead of paying bills all the time, and they figured out neat stuff and were honored greatly by everyone except the phone company.

In this regard, Louie was probably better off as a bunny, since that gave him lots of time to just cogitate on things like the space-time continuum and big-bang when he wasn't throwing things.

If you constantly had Bonny's fur getting in your nose, you'd throw things too. This is particularly true when you're trying to solve the Grand Theory of the Universe and Everything, but can't concentrate because of all the sneezing. Louie had a terrible temper in those days and would kick things furiously, or pick up things and throw them across the room, which often had the effect of scaring the heck out of poor Bonny and causing huge clouds of fur to fly as she scrabbled for safety from Louie's rages.

Why should anyone care? The answer is that leaving out the background information is totally unfair to the future worshipers of a genius. So what if Newton was a worthless sloth while everyone else took care of his phone bills. So what if Einstein had a cushy, overpaid government job and all the technical science information he cared to stick his nose into as a patent clerk. Louie's I.Q. had to be written as powers of ten, but he was a rabbit with an attitude. -So what? Does anyone hold sway against Bethoven because of his tantrums?

The Big Bang turned out to be the Big Flop, since it didn't bang at all. Point of fact, it's still right where it has always been at no where and no when, without time or dimension. Instead of a big kapow, a gentle push just began drifting things away from no where and no when to gain both dimension and time, and negative dimension and minus time. From our perspective, the other side of the big bang is evolving time and dimensions in the opposite direction as our own. From their perspective, new experiences will evolve in their future as their progression of time flows forward, just as we see things "over here." In either time, the opposite universe is separated by both time and dimension twice as far as their own clocks have ticked and their tape measures have grown. This is the way the universe and our own world evolves. -Not as huge, energy-sucking blasts of glory, but as timeless dribbles of change and compensation.

As Louie saw it, conservation principals are immutable, but one can't get into a rut with every detail. For instance, things can transmute energy and mass, but they also transmute time and dimension. Both time and dimension are gifts that grow as our universe gains displacement from no where no when, or from the origin, if you wish to call it that. The one thing that must be sacrificed for this to work is the holy grail of C - light speed. It only applies in the here and now of this point in spacetime. At the origin, C is undefined (division by zero), no dimension has evolved and time does not move.

That place sounds a bit like a black hole but with significant differences. Suppose the physical "constants" have already laughed at the bald-headed physicists who will someday, arrogantly believe that constants in their bitty little universe have always been constants elsewhere. For instance, if dimension has evolved with time as we drifted away from the origin, how would you measure velocity when dimensions are shorter and time is slower? Going backward toward the origin, time would continue to move slower and slower while each dimension of distance shrinks in a linear fashion.

Whoops! -Why linear? Why not shrink dimension X, for instance, with some other exponent than one? In relating that information, Louie suddenly spat out a flurry of expletives and yet another hairball of beautiful, silvery blue fur; certainly not his own. That delayed the explanation for a few days until his attention could be secured once more, but the gist of it is the inordinate evidence of inverse-square distance relationships observable in the universe. Energy itself relates in this fashion. If you approached the origin without dimension or time, then gravity must be zero (no dimension/no vector value for gravity) and everything is contained inside a dimensionless monstrosity of mass. But moving away from the origin, the inverse square relationships of energy versus velocity (thought experiment: relate velocity in expanding spacetime - see the example experiment below, "measuring lightspeed.") treat energy as if it contained a two dimensional shadow from a pure linear expansion of a distant source. Mass equals energy divided by the square of velocity. But velocity is speed over distance, and distance is based on growing dimensional values as the experiment egresses away from the origin. A complex consequence limitation of this scenario requires all observations to be made from only one spacetime, however the observed results are due to the reference frame of creation, like observing starlight from a previous spacetime. That creates an automatic vignetted view of progressive devolution in spacetime back toward the origin.

What would a monstrosity of mass be in a point without gravity or dimension? How would it be defined if gravity couldn't even affect it. How could gravity pull it anywhere without any dimensions? So, unlike a black hole, all this stuff can stay there forever or perhaps just ooze out to where dimension and time begin to evolve and take it on a new journey.

The classic Big Bang Theory evolves the universe with a big pop, at which time a whole pile of constants are simultaneously created for physicists to worship fondly, or for heretics to be burned because they did not worship the physicist's constants.

Louie worships no such idols. It's easy to ignore such trivia when a blob of fur is stuck on your nose - kind'a drags you back into the more immediate and relevant issues. Considering that evolving time and space is a product of displacement from the origin, Louie fully believes that what appears to be universal constants from our flash-point perspective of the universe are actually resultant values of our proximity in the evolution of spacetime this far from the origin. Believing this, Hubble photos of deep space would show evidence that the apparent age of objects is not what one would expect, if they thought that light speed based on our values of dimension, for instance, has never changed since the Big Bang. -And guess what the Hubble deep space photos have shown scientists... (!)

Yes, or current crop of Constant Worshippers are every bit as daft as Bonny is. You've got a better shot at Truth using some beach pebble arrangement hocus-pocus formula to outguess the universe than to rely on science.

Now scientists aren't total fools, although they don't have Louie's brainpower or anything near it. Science is very fond of Quantum Mechanics, but only because a fellow named Feynman probably had a smart rabbit of his own and got the Sum of All Possibilities vector math worked out pretty well for the stuff inside atoms, that is, until you start looking at tiny, tiny things like strings hiding inside little bitty parts of atoms. Inside tiny parts of atoms are huge universes of things that, once again, laugh at us.

They laughed at Niels Henrik David Bohr. Niels Bohr was a really smart fellow and everyone knew that he was, but he couldn't stand the little things laughing at him and finally blurted out his Copenhagen Convention idea, which generally admits that every time you try to predict what will happen but you look at little things, they do something different simply because you were watching and they are trying to ruin your reputation for being smart. Dr. Richard Feynman covered his reputation better by saying that the results included every possibility added together. How could you go wrong with that? No human is that smart, so Feynman obviously did have a smart rabbit. Einstein got caught in the same trap once when he would look at one little thing over there and something else over here would change, rather like a turning on the lamp in your bathroom makes the car horn honk outside. Ridiculous! Peals of laughter from the microguys! Einstein was furious, stating that he refused to believe that God would play dice with the universe. It affected Einstein so deeply that he avoided microscopes for the rest of his life.

In the age of science's total failure to teach tiny subatomic particles to sit up or roll over on command, mathematicians like Heisenberg invented theories to explain why scientists that burned huge amounts of grant money but couldn't teach one trick to a little electron should still get paid.

Anyhow, back to Louie's Big Flop Theory: Instead of this huge explosion described by popular physics, in the Big Flop Theory, material just begins to drift away from the time-stalled, dimensionless origin, rather bumping and pushing as dimension, energy and time begin to carry the material into a new sea of existence, sort of like ocean waves picking up a pile of compost on a beach and diffusing it out to sea. In the Big Flop, our waves just float without time at first, then begin to go faster and faster as both dimension and time expand.

Now, if the exponents work out correctly during expansion, you could pick up a stopwatch and "measure" the distance that light travels in second. Supposed that your flashlight shined to a mirror placed in space then returned one second later, covering a distance of 186,000 miles during the trip. Then you sit there patiently removing bunny fur from your face until, eons later, you run the same test again. You are not aware that all dimension has evolved, or that your clock ticks much faster than it used to tick. Your perception of distance is dependent on relativity (oh horrors! - there's that word!) and you again place a mirror in space for the one-second light speed test. But, your universe is bigger than it was. It is, in fact, expanding nearly as fast as light will travel, giving you a Doppler shift radiation of 3 degrees Kelvin from the edge. All the constants have changed, but with more total dimension and a faster clock, you adjust "distance" to suit the same constant you measured the first time, and you're a happy scientist. You're happy, that is, until you try to look outside of your own spacetime and into the consequential light of a different spacetime, where you can clearly hear laughter waifting through the cosmos.

There's much more to this Big Flop Theory. I've tried to relate the basics for the time being, avoiding serious issues like consequence or the details of conservation, or intelligent direction which is nearly unavoidable since there is infinite probability of occurrence, all of which do flow nicely with the Theory. Louie is a tough study and I wouldn't expect anyone to handle the entire issue at once. It's not like they'll hand me a PhD for transcribing the Big Flop notes or anything like that.

- More later. I'll probably spew out these pieces as "Notes" like Feynman did, so that I don't have to sort or organize them. -TB


return to virtualpath homepage return to science & technology index

Copyright 1998 - 2005 Virtual Path Graphics