• images/banners/banner2.png
  • images/banners/banner3.png


JUlia Implant flowers005

The Big Bang Theory implies that the space-time does not stretch out indefinitely but rather the universe has an outer boundary, which is expanding. In this model, I picture the universe as a sponge. Therefore, I hypothesize that the universe also has internal boundaries, or interfaces with whatever that does or does not exist out of boundaries of space-time. I have further assumed that the proposed singularity exists out of the internal boundaries of space-time as well. Hereafter, I will call the inside boundaries the Planck pores. This model also assumes that consciousness originate from beyond the boundaries of space-time.

Many physicists, such as James Hartle and Stephen Hawking, believe that the paradoxes in theoretical physics can be solved only by specifying the boundary conditions of the universe. Here we explore the boundaries and try to look for evidences for the model given the current state of knowledge.

Before the brightness of day or the darkness of night, we get the greys of dawn and dusk. Likewise, as this model shows, the structure of the space-time pales whenever we get close to the interface between space-time and the proposed singularity, namely at the Big Bang moment, in the vicinity of the outer boundaries of the universe, beyond black hole horizons, Planck pores and the border lines of consciousness realm. In this section, I will show how the elements of space-time become pale as we approach the greys of dawn or in other words, when we get close to the boundaries.
Complex Numbers and my interpretation of them are explained in the sections Complex Numbers and Wave-Particle Function. In The unit circle diagram shown below, the value of tangible elements measured by X-axis decreases and disappears as the vector turns counter-clockwise and coincides with Y-axis which denotes i or non-tangible properties in this model.


I deduce from the above diagram that tangible elements of space-time fade away as we approach the boundaries of universe and approximate the purely imaginary domain. This process is explored further below.


Matter as it appears in macrocosm is massive, tangible, atomic and localized. In ultra small scale all of the above characteristics fade away. According to most accepted theory, matter acquires mass from Higg’s field upon acceleration inside space-time. Quantum Field theory sees the so called subatomic particle as unbounded fields rather than bounded particles. Fields are not local but extended to the boundaries of the universe. A particle is just a local excitation of the field. On the other hand, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle does not allow the quantum to be localized in one point of the field. Art Hobson from Department of Physics, University of Arkansas, in an article submitted to ArXiv on April 2012 titled”There are no particles, there are only fields”[1] 
Writes, "Particles are epiphenomena arising from real fields. Thus the Schroedinger field is not a probability amplitude for "finding, upon measurement, a particle" but rather a real space-filling field; the field for an electron is the electron"

He further continues,"There are overwhelming grounds to conclude that all the fundamental constituents of quantum physics are fields rather than particles." 

Einstein’ popular formula (E = mc2) implies that matter can be converted from energy. In microcosm energy fields and energy prevails and the notion of matter fades away. The concept of creation and annihilation of virtual particles in vacuum is another evidence of appearance and disappearance of matter in the vicinity of internal boundaries

As we get down the scale to particle physics, we find more evidences that the notion of matter becomes more subtle and pale. The photon is mass-less, and even its existence is under question. In 1969, Lamb and Scully showed that one could account for the photoelectric effect without using the concept of photon as a minimum packet of light energy. They were able to introduce an entirely different theory of the photoelectric effect, one that did not invoke the concept of light’s particle nature. They concluded that the photoelectric effect does not prove that the photon exists. In addition, George Greenstein writes,

[In 1956] The Hansbury-Brown and Twiss experiment failed to demonstrate the existence of photons and the indivisibility of weak light. It actually showed that light seemed to travel through space “bunched up”. One can divide the bunch in half, and the two half bunches arrive at the different photo detectors at the same time. These result startled the physics community and launched an entirely a new discipline, the explicit study of quantum nature of light.

Later on, the same experiment was repeated by laser, which still did not support the particle nature of light. In 1986, in the Grangier, Roger, and Aspect experiment, the non-divisibility of a light unit was shown as evidence of the presence of photons. They used a well-collimated stream of calcium atoms. In their next experiment, they allowed the photon to pass through Mach-Zehnder interferometer. They obtained an interference pattern as a path length traveled by light in one arm of the interferometer was increased relative to the other. Therefore, light divided and passed thorough both ways. Again, the result pales the concept of the photon. Greenstein and Zajonc conclude,

It is ironic that Albert Einstein, arguably the greatest physicist since Newton, received the Nobel Prize for work that subsequently turned out to be flawed. And it is doubly ironic that this work, which was instrumental in placing before us the concept of wave particle duality, turned out to be correct even though flawed … The central lesson of the story we have recounted … is that the concept of the photon is far more subtle that has been previously thought.[2]

George Greenstein and Arthur G. Zajonc. The Quantum Challenge. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2001 
© 2008 UniversalTheory.org . All rights reserved.