What if the universe is infinite in every direction, macro and micro?

[westwall]

Gravity is everything. I see gravity as the footprint in the snow of existence of being.


I'm not sure it is. It could be a bubble, or a sphere, a ball, or something else. Probably unknowable to us.


Which would be consistent with the Vedic principle of Mahavishnu creating innumerable universes upon the causal ocean. They even go so far as to define the lengths of time all of this takes.


That is more in keeping with current western theory based on "dark energy." I'm not at all convinced that dark energy is real or anything more than just a bandaid idea created to explain observation, much less that both dark energy/expansion leading to a dark and empty universe AND and oscillating universe cannot BOTH be true. Perhaps first it expands then that dies out to be followed by contraction; after all, we know now that matter in the universe is not even the dominant substance in it, and contraction would be more consistent with the conservation of energy law.

Likewise, if gravity curves spacetime in upon itself, then it truly cannot be said to even have an outer boundary in the normal sense, because there is no going to or beyond that point without creating more spacetime! In fact, no matter where we travel in our universe, a person always sees themselves at the center of the universe, not at the edge, so we cannot even point to any point in the universe as where spacetime expanded from!

Correct. That's another reason why I have always had a problem with the Big Bang theory as a whole. If all matter in the Universe originated from a singularity, how then can we have galaxies colliding? Debris from explosions radiates AWAY from the point of detonation, how then do you get galaxies crossing at right angles?

 

[Anomalism]

Or maybe it just takes a little bit of "crazy" to be sane these days. Remember, when Einstein was in high school, his teacher thought him a bit slow, and after graduating college, he could not even get a good job. He held some stupid teaching position somewhere then finally worked as a patent clerk.

In fact, no one would even read any of his papers. Einstein only got accidentally discovered because one guy read his paper on special relativity and saw the potential in what it said.

If I didn't know any better I'd have interrupted some signal of respect in this post.

 

[toobfreak]

Correct. That's another reason why I have always had a problem with the Big Bang theory as a whole. If all matter in the Universe originated from a singularity, how then can we have galaxies colliding? Debris from explosions radiates AWAY from the point of detonation, how then do you get galaxies crossing at right angles?

Well, astrophysics actually explains that pretty well in that what is expanding is spacetime and matter with it, but within that are pockets of clusters and superclusters of galaxies within which hydrogen contracts and evolves into new stars, forming new associations who then locally attract, collide and interact, sometimes forming new bigger galaxies, sometimes just tearing others apart.

The issue here is scale. Gravity across large scales of super clusters and such works to expand space while gravity across short, local scales can act as a quasi-independent system within the larger system.

Funny though as the 'Big Bang' was originally postulated as a joke by Prof. Fred Hoyle (who was also one kick-ass sci-fi writer (try reading 'The Black Cloud') who was actually ridiculing the idea of a non-steadystate universe.

Actually, most of our entire basis upon which to believe in a big bang is really mostly all based on Hubble's observation that our galaxies are moving apart.

But if you have time to read a little more, I'll lay another pet theory on you:

If you place a long stick in water, it appears to bend (due to differential refraction of light between the differences in the indices of refraction between water and air), yet the stick just LOOKS bent, we know it is still straight.

Now take that analogy and project this question: what if looking across spacetime for millions of parsecs, the red doppler shift we see is not due to an actual expansion of space but due to some as-of-yet not understood quality of space? Like goldfish in a round bowl looking out through the glass at the room beyond?

Just as an aside, our local galaxy M31 in Andromeda (about twice the size of the Milky Way and the largest member of the Local Group) is not moving away from us neither but is actually heading straight for us at about 250,000 mph.

 

[sparky]

great....now i'm a goldfish Toob......~S~

 

[sparky]

oh, and now i'm unsure of just what gravity is.......other than falling outta bed now/then....~S~

 

[Nobody911]

Consciousness, a complex and not fully understood phenomenon, raises intriguing questions when explored alongside concepts like the multiverse and the afterworld. In the context of the multiverse, some theories propose that consciousness might exist in multiple dimensions or realities simultaneously. This suggests that our perception of self and reality could be just one version among countless others. Some interpretations of quantum mechanics, such as the many-worlds interpretation, imply that every decision or event branches into multiple outcomes, potentially leading to parallel instances of consciousness. This raises philosophical questions about identity and continuity—if consciousness can exist in different forms across multiple universes, what does that mean for our understanding of self?

Regarding the afterworld, various philosophical and spiritual traditions suggest that consciousness persists beyond physical death. Concepts of reincarnation or a spiritual realm imply that consciousness is not merely a product of biological processes but may have an existence independent of the body. This perspective aligns with certain interpretations of quantum mechanics that hint at non-locality, where consciousness could transcend physical limits. Both ideas challenge our understanding of reality and consciousness, suggesting that the nature of existence may be far more intricate than we currently comprehend.

Ultimately, the exploration of consciousness in relation to the multiverse and the afterworld remains a profound and speculative area of inquiry.

Birds do not know the sky they soar through. Fish do not know the waters that cradle them. And humans remain unaware of the hidden worlds that surround them.

Science is not the only way to figure out what is real or understand the other worlds.

 

[scruffy]

This perspective aligns with certain interpretations of quantum mechanics that hint at non-locality,

Entanglement is the only form of quantum non-locality ever discovered.

where consciousness could transcend physical limits.

Nope. Pure fantasy. If it exists, it's physical. End of story.

Both ideas challenge our understanding of reality and consciousness, suggesting that the nature of existence may be far more intricate than we currently comprehend.

Consciousness requires the brain as a substrate. There is no consciousness without a brain.

In fact, I can even turn off your consciousness externally, by stimulating a tiny part of your brainstem magnetically.

Science is not the only way to figure out what is real or understand the other worlds.

I believe in engineering. If you can engineer something, you must know enough of the science to engineer it.

Science is trial by doing. Engineering begins where science leaves off. This is something I'm seeing acutely in the machine learning community. I have a biology background, and I never had to make anything perform to spec. Scientists succeed when they get to the "look, it's possible" stage, and then they stop. Then the engineers have to take over, to get the system to play nice with other systems and to commercialize the discovery. But they have to be a bit scientific too, cause they have to collect and understand all the scientists' output.

 

[sparky]

In fact, I can even turn off your consciousness externally, by stimulating a tiny part of your brainstem magnetically.

magnetically?? , maybe i can get some sleep afterall?? ~S~

 

[Muhammed]

We usually think of the universe as infinite in space. Galaxies receding endlessly, stars stretching beyond our sight. But what if that infinity exists at the micro level too? What if there’s no bottom, no smallest scale, just as there may be no top?

Imagine every galaxy we see is the size of an electron in another universe. And every electron in our world could be an entire galaxy in a cosmos we’ll never reach. Boundaries vanish. Space and time become fractal, repeating endlessly, with their own rules at each level. Physics gives us limits; Planck length, quantum discreteness, but maybe those are just local laws. Somewhere else, somewhere smaller or larger, reality could obey entirely different rules, endlessly.

In this scenario, infinity isn’t abstract; it’s layered, recursive, and tangible. No beginnings, no ends, just scale upon scale, each real to whatever consciousness perceives it. Reality might not be a container at all. It could be a mirror facing mirrors, reflecting universes within universes, forever.

Infinite regress at micro and macro levels would mean there’s no ultimate base reality, just nested realities, each as real as the one we occupy.

 

[Muhammed]

A fractal is the physical reflection or representation of "micro infinity."

View attachment 1223712
View attachment 1223713
View attachment 1223714
View attachment 1223715

Put them in motion. Smaller and smaller and the tone gets higher and higher...

 

[scruffy]

All fractals are procedural. They require an algorithm. There's no such thing as "the equation of a fractal". I can show you how to make one though. Start with a lattice, and for each square, put a dot with probability p.

Question: what is the probability that we'll get a column of dots spanning the entire height of the lattice? When p is close to 0, the probability of getting a whole column of dots is also nearly 0. But when p is 0.95, the probability of getting a whole column of dots is very high. We can actually graph this, p(row)/p(dot), which is called the "scaling", and when we do, we see this:

The axis labeled T is what I'm calling p. (This picture came from a spin glass where T is temperature - same thing, as the temperature goes up the probability of filling a hole goes up too). The probability of getting an entire column is ZERO up until a critical point, at which the slope becomes infinite.

The critical point, is called a "phase transition", that's where water becomes steam, or magnets lose their magnetization. And that's where your fractals live, right in the boundary between the two phases. We can destroy the fractals by destroying the boundary, by removing dots from the lattice. At the critical point where there are just the right number of dots, the correlation distance goes to infinity, and the dynamics obey a power law.

The procedure that got you here was putting the dots in the lattice. This is what the boundary actually looks like:

It is scale-free and self-similar at any level of resolution. The critical value of p has been measured and is approximately 0.593.

 

[Anomalism]

Put them in motion. Smaller and smaller and the tone gets higher and higher...

That video is strikingly close to how I imagine the universe.

 

[sparky]

love reading you guys......~S~

 

[Mack The Finger]

UGLY !

 

[Mack The Finger]

Infinite regress at micro and macro levels would mean there’s no ultimate base reality, just nested realities, each as real as the one we occupy.

Thanks for sharing that...I'll keep it in mind if it ever comes up in converstation.

 

[Anomalism]

Thanks for sharing that...I'll keep it in mind if it ever comes up in converstation.

You never know.

 

[DennisPTate]

We usually think of the universe as infinite in space. Galaxies receding endlessly, stars stretching beyond our sight. But what if that infinity exists at the micro level too? What if there’s no bottom, no smallest scale, just as there may be no top?

Imagine every galaxy we see is the size of an electron in another universe. And every electron in our world could be an entire galaxy in a cosmos we’ll never reach. Boundaries vanish. Space and time become fractal, repeating endlessly, with their own rules at each level. Physics gives us limits; Planck length, quantum discreteness, but maybe those are just local laws. Somewhere else, somewhere smaller or larger, reality could obey entirely different rules, endlessly.

In this scenario, infinity isn’t abstract; it’s layered, recursive, and tangible. No beginnings, no ends, just scale upon scale, each real to whatever consciousness perceives it. Reality might not be a container at all. It could be a mirror facing mirrors, reflecting universes within universes, forever.

Infinite regress at micro and macro levels would mean there’s no ultimate base reality, just nested realities, each as real as the one we occupy.

Wow!

Dr. Albert Einstein did state something about infinite smallness being just as logically possible as infinite bigness.

A near death experiencer was shown that the computer coding for our universe was in the twenty two letters of the Hebrew alphabet.





www.AlonAnava.com/

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We usually think of the universe as infinite in space. Galaxies receding endlessly, stars stretching beyond our sight. But what if that infinity exists at the micro level too? What if there’s no bottom, no smallest scale, just as there may be no top?

Imagine every galaxy we see is the size of an electron in another universe. And every electron in our world could be an entire galaxy in a cosmos we’ll never reach. Boundaries vanish. Space and time become fractal, repeating endlessly, with their own rules at each level. Physics gives us limits; Planck length, quantum discreteness, but maybe those are just local laws. Somewhere else, somewhere smaller or larger, reality could obey entirely different rules, endlessly.

In this scenario, infinity isn’t abstract; it’s layered, recursive, and tangible. No beginnings, no ends, just scale upon scale, each real to whatever consciousness perceives it. Reality might not be a container at all. It could be a mirror facing mirrors, reflecting universes within universes, forever.

Infinite regress at micro and macro levels would mean there’s no ultimate base reality, just nested realities, each as real as the one we occupy.

It may be, but that won't affect us. The Planck length is a distance limit, much as the speed of light is a speed limit.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Nope. Pure fantasy. If it exists, it's physical. End of story.

This

 

[Hafar1014]

The topic makes sense to me.

IN what way does an infinite universe have any relevant effect on your life. Its hypothetical construct and makes no difference. What does your life mean? What have you done for humanity. What have you given to society? Will you be remembered or forgotten