|
Fellow Group Members, I have a bit of "fodder" for everyone in the group to have a go at. This is
a good dose of intellectual stimulation and will no doubt produce controversy. See http://jaypritzker.org/book (an open access PDF). I look forward to seeing your thoughts and criticisms here. - A. F. Mayer Indeed, a valiant effort to 'breathe' some 'reformist air' into
the stagnation of (many of) the prevailing orthodox paradigms found within theoretical physics.
Many of the sentiments
with respect to the historical (you might term it Pythagorean-Newtonian) developments in physics I would share with you and
your approach.
There must indeed be found an elegance and a beauty underpinning the 'unifying symmetry
equations' (as espoused by Murray Gell-Mann in your referenced video).
Much in your book so eloquently addresses
the 'loss of perspective of natural philosophy' of the contemporary modus operandi of physics in the prevailing viewpoint
of the religion of 'materialistic reductionisms'.
As so many other 'dissidents'; you however
then continue to misidentify the 'Canonical Cosmology' in your misinterpretations of the 'Beginning of spacetime'.
Yes, the Big Bang Cosmology (BBC) is 'wrong'; but it is wrong in some of its assumptions and presuppositions
and not its basic premises.
The BBC is 'correct' in its thermodynamic Planck-Black Body radiator expansion, say
based on the bosonic gas interpretation of the relativistic spacetimematter background.
It is 'wrong'
in then associating displacement scales onto this 'correct' thermodynamic background.
And intuitively, you (and
many others like our Roy Wolford resident on this site) are well justified to question the linear interpretation of the entropic
timearrow and such, reducing to the spacetime singularity of the Big Bang.
The 'geometric interpretation'
of time as a lightpath proportion is of course both necessary and requirement in any cosmology and as verified by measurement
and observation.
But to postulate a necessary infiniteness for such a cosmology is not only superfluous, but misleading
for many 'amateur' scientific thinkers and philosophers.
Firstly, the decomposition of the Minkowski
metric shows clearly, that the 4th spacetime dimension simply adds a freedom degree for the velocity of any inertial object.
The Pythagorean theorem in 4 dimensions simply assigns a 'movement in time' superposed onto a 'movement
in space'.
For any object so to move at maximum speed in space, the movement in time must be zero (hence the
energy momentum relation in Special Relativity assigns 0-mass and maximum speed c to photons) and vice versa.
So
ONLY if an object is stationary in the observed reference frame, will a maximum movement through time become possible.
This is termed the 4-velocity vector in the formal nomenclature in Special Relativity.
Secondly, one can
'do away' with the Minkowski metric altogether; should one posulate a 'discrete' fractal spacetime origin
(again as favoured by Gell-Mann in his onion-fractalized selfsimilarities).
Postulating this
fractalised (and holographic) cosmology; renders the Big Bang Singularity not so much as a 'Beginning in universal time';
but as a 'Beginning in LINEARISED time'.
The notion of a 'cyclic NOW time' then DEFINES a minimum
duration as 'quasi-Planck-Time' quantisation.
So the conventional Big Bang DID begin a timecount;
but as defined by the singularity quantum, (defining space and time and the emergent METRIC 4-vectors etc).
Thirdly, the notion of 'Cyclic Big Bang Crunches' and of linear MultiUniverses becomes superfluous as
well.
If the primordial spacetimequantum represents the fractal building block for say the (flat) Minkowski metric; then
the 'reanalysed' BBC specifies not only the 'observable' spacetime continuum (as quantum count); but
also the 'granular' nature of all physical phenopmena in toto (because the Laws of Physics are all interrelated in
7 mensuration units and the characterising equations and formalisms).
Lastly, the search for a unified (physical)
theory reduces then to the search for the principles and the abstract symbolic archetypes (say mathematical archetypes 'energized'
by Newton's or/and [DIY] Spirit); which allowed or induced the primordial spacetime quantum to EMERGE from its own
abstraction.
No infinite preexistingspacetime is necessary for such an endeavour; as then the reasons for
this selfsame eternal preexistence would have to be found in even older principles ad infinitum.
The 'creative
source' so must and will be found by proper and unbiased application of the scientific method.
John Shadow
|
