Monday, July 12, 2010

Axioms of Existence without Creator

The notion of creator at the level of existence itself is equivalent to accepting the existence as the starting point. However, we must also accept certain properties for the existence in order to make up for actions that a creator would have caused.

We begin with a few simple axioms that avoid contradictions. After presenting axioms we proceed with the outcome of imagination resulting from these axioms. Ordinarily, one should make scientific derivations that may help us make predictions. However, at this stage I would be happy with a philosophical view that helps me avoid superstition.

Certainly, there will be better views as we move forward. The question is whether we will be there in that future. Religious superstitions and strangled democracies are effective tools in helping a tiny fraction of us exploit everyone else. This tiny fraction is served by, much larger groups at various levels. Some make the laws, others enforce the cruel laws and yet others spy on our intellectuals or eliminate them.

Who will win and at what cost is unknown. It is therefore worth improving our understanding of whatever it is that we are living in. Perhaps some of us and in a faraway galaxy will achieve the balance of happiness in a cooperative social life without giving up our privacy and dignity as an individual.

The grand solution to understanding the laws of existence will not come from theories and mathematical models for the laws governing the stars. We need a Copernicus to formulate our simple daily observations of Tycho.Brahe before a Newton can write the next Principia Mathematica of the laws of existence.

For now scientist will amuse themselves with fictions in search of truth. Consider the speed of light being constant relative to an observer. Suppose the planet we are leaving, at speed near the speed of light, is transmitting our favorite show, which we are watching on a TV on our spaceship. In order not to see the show in slow motion our ship must slow down in passage of time. This makes scientists believe that we might be able to reach far away planets by traveling near the speed of light.

The other way round is more interesting. Suppose, at the same time the planet we are approaching is also transmitting another one of our favorite shows. We switch our TV channel to watch the show from the planet we are approaching. Now, in order not to see the show in fast-forward our ship must speed up in passage of time. So, at the same time we are passing the time very slowly, and very fast. Which one is the one that is actually happening to us?

Axiom 1. There is existence.

This is simply equivalent to saying I think therefore I exist. Here, we are postulating the being of existence.

Axiom 2. Existence is all there is.

In other words, existence is unbounded. There is no beyond to existence. It also means there are no gaps in existence.

Axiom 3. Existence is simple.

The phrase Fabric Of Existence (FOE) is unfortunate due to lack of better terminology. The axiom means that the FOE is not made up of anything. Think of it as the soul of god.

Now we present a controversial axiom.

Axiom 4. Existence distorts.

The controversial points are the lack of cause for distortions, and whether distortions are permanent. As for the permanence one can argue that the distortions eventually fade away. With regard to principles such as causality I believe there is no difference between those principles and the view of flat world by our ancestors.

The assumption that an entity outside of the existence causes the distortions violates the second axiom resulting in rather meaningless views. Furthermore, we postulate our principles based on our observations within our universe, and its physical laws. Things can be different prior to the birth of a universe.

We can imagine two forms of distortions in FOE, but there may be other possibilities. A contraction is an Inward Compaction (IC) of FOE, while an expansion is an Outward Dilation (OD) of FOE.

We now proceed with philosophical imaginative views resulting from these axioms.

Distortions range from infinitesimal to infinitely large. However, a distortion does not have a physical size. For instance, consider an IC, the kind of distortion that we shall associate with gravity. Depending on its intensity, an IC will have a clear range within which it can attract other IC. The mass and physical size of an IC is this range.

Otherwise put, a distortion is a mathematical point without physical dimensions. What we measure as mass or size of a distortion is the range of its intensity. We will use the term size when referring to distortions, however.

Distortions in their smallest sizes are referred to as energy. We refer to an IC kind of energy as Positive, and to an OD kind as Negative energy.

A sufficiently large IC is called a black hole. As we shall discuss, OD distortions remain small. The following postulate establishes the types of interactions among distortions.

Distortion Postulate. Two IC absorb one another. Two OD repel one another. An IC and an OD attract one another.

Note that two IC absorb one another. I believe existence only produces infinitesimal distortions. This is just an opinion, but I cannot imagine existence suddenly producing a black hole the size of an entire universe.

Tiny IC distortions could be produced close enough to one another so they attract each other. Collisions that result in explosions may follow certain laws such as relative size of the IC and their speed and angle of collision. I believe in most cases they absorb one another and combine into a larger IC.

As an IC grows bigger than its surrounding IC, it continues to absorb them and grow. Note that the extent of the gravitational effects of an IC distortion may be very large but the actual distortion itself need not have a physical size.

Whether we assign a size to an IC distortion or not, I believe that all IC absorbed by a larger IC lose information. For instance, if a black hole absorbs an entire galaxy, there will be no memory left in the existence to recreate any part of that galaxy except for the energy that it sent out during the time of its existence prior to its absorption. We see celestial objects that have ceased to exist for billions of years.

Since the OD distortions do not combine they cannot grow. A collision of an OD and an IC probably cancels out one of them leaving behind the leftover of the larger one in any number of pieces. At any rate, I believe that larger OD do exist in the form of anti-matter.

A distortion of either kind may come with different properties. Some IC may have positive electric charge, some negative charge and others may be neutral. I am not sure if this happens at time of their creation, or it is a property relative to the physical laws of a given universe.

Matter seems to be a large IC as compared to what we consider to be energy. The nucleus is probably just a single IC distortion with many smaller IC, the electrons, rotating around them. The rotational behavior of electrons must be similar to those of black holes rather than moons and planets. This is because I think black holes and nucleus are identical distortions except for their sizes.

I believe we should start with a simple theory at the bottom and attempt to explain ordinary phenomena like refraction, with an understanding of top-level established theories. As we go we should pay attention to avoiding contradictions because existence is not controversial or paradoxical. I hope this note helps as an example of such an approach.

I close this note with an imaginary view. The positive kind of energy, the IC kind, is probably mostly of the neutral kind. Light seems to be of this kind. However, magnetic fields seem to be of the kind with negative electric charge, same as electrons. In other words, all energy is not of the same one kind. So the question now is what about the energy with positive kind of electric charge? Is there, yet another kind of force field that we have overlooked so far?

Labels: , , , ,