Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:17:09 +0930
Subject: Dan Quayle - galactic adventurer.


John Foster wrote:
> 
> Luke quotes
> 
> 'Space is almost infinite. As a matter of fact, we think it is infinite.'
> - Dan Quayle
> 
> This is a funny statement Luke. Space may be boundless in the sense that it
> is expanding, but to say it is infinite or almost infinite is really funny.
> 'Binary logic' seems to trip people up. What are your comments on this
> quote, or does any one else have a comment on this conception of space as......?

It IS a funny statement, isn't it?... funny that Mr. Quayle exhibits such a
poor knowledge of basic transcendental mathematics and that he is capable of
contradicting himself at such short notice.

"almost infinite"... a "very unique" oxymoron.


> If outer space was infinite then light would not travel in a circle, and the
> universe would also have no beginning nor end. It may not end -the universe
> - to say that it is infinitely big, or bigger than big is a metaphysical
> error. Perhaps the universe is a split phrase, or an entity that possesses
> contradictory-complimentary fundamential properties?
 
Eric J. Lerner proposed an infinitely expanding universe based on regenerating
plasma filaments (or some such - I lost interest in his book I'm afraid)...

I like Gribbin's idea which links the ideas of stellar formation, black holes
and evolutionary theory. Each time a star of suitable mass contracts and forms
a black hole another universe is created at the point of quantum singularity, a
universe "at right angles" to our own which, due to the incredible stresses
upon matter and space, possesses slightly altered laws of physics. In this
way, only those universes which encourage star formation have any hope of
giving rise to "offspring" universes - a kind of natural selection. Our
universe itself, then, would in fact likely be the interior of a black hole.
And what started all this? random quantum fluctuations... and what started
THIS??... accepting this idea means that our universe is but a tiny part of the
"multiverse"... something like the "many worlds" theory of quantum mechanics...
a grand universe of infinite possibilities.

The "big bang" theory is still generally accepted, and it does appear that our
universe is expanding. This being so, it is safe to assume that the topology of
our universe is roughly akin to a fourth dimensional (in terms of space-time) 
hyper sphere - finite, yet unbounded. We exist on a three dimensional surface
of this fourth dimensional hyper sphere. It is easier to visualize this
phenomena by reducing the number of dimensions.

Imagine, for example, ants living on the surface of an expanding balloon. Their
universe is considered as the two dimensional surface of a three dimensional
sphere. Their universe has three dimensions, yet these ants are only capable of
perceiving a two dimensional surface. This surface on which they live is
finite, yet unbounded. It also has no center. If they head in one direction for
long enough they will return to their point of origin. The balloon is so large
that they fail to detect the curvature of space within their universe.

Presumably it is so with our universe - it is finite, yet unbounded; it has no
center; space itself is curved so that heading in one direction for long enough
will lead you back to where you started.

As for the end of the universe, and accepting the big bang theory, generally,
there are two possible conclusions. If a certain critical level of matter
exists in the universe, then expansion will slow, stop, and undergo
gravitational collapse - "the big crunch" (which may in fact lead to a
rebounding effect so that we may live in an oscillating universe, we may be
immortal yet forever living the same lives). If this critical level of matter
does not exist, then heat death ensues: the universe continues to expand, the
gaps between the stars grows larger, the universe burns out, darkens, and the
fundamental components of matter itself begins to decay.

As for your suggestion that the universe may be "an entity that possesses
contradictory-complimentary fundamental properties"... yes, quantum physics
already gives us this picture - the "wave-particle duality" suggests that
photons can be examined as waves or particles, but not both at the same time.
But we must be careful, it is only human reasoning and logic which is capable
of contradiction, not matter and energy. Any "contradictory properties" we
discover about the universe reflect either an incomplete knowledge or a lack of
proper understanding.


> Plato states in Timaeus that the universe is a body without organs since it
> does not need organs to expell its' wastes. It recycles these wastes, and
> since there is nothing outside the universe no organs of perception are
> needed. It is the orginal BWO.

What does it mean to "be" an organism in a void? an organism made of sentient
components? It is not that organs which are designed to detect external stimuli
are not needed in such an organism, it is that the concept has absolutely no
meaning. If we decide to attribute any form of consciousness or instinct to
such a being, does that pose a threat to the concept of human free-will? 

> In truth ignorant,
> 
> John


In deceit knowledgeable,


Luke Pellen
e-mail: luke-AT-seol.net.au
ICQ#: 25510475
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
'Space is almost infinite. As a matter of fact, we think it is infinite.'
- Dan Quayle
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Chaotic Pearl:  http://members.tripod.com/~vidagnosis/journal.html

This random quotation was generated by SIGGEN...
SIGGEN is an e-mail signature generator programmed by Luke Pellen