Cosmological Scenarios

Author: ebuc

Posts

Total: 40
Topic's author
#1
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
I have two of them. First one is older version, that, I envisoned when first learning about entropic heat death of Universe. Both always and only consider a finite, occupied space Universe.

..1] Fuller believed he had discovered the operating system of Universe to be his jitterbugging VE.  This link is integral to half of my first, geometric, cosmological scenario, http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/plates/figs/plate04.html

...2} the other has only come to me in last couple of years, and stems from my explorations of prime number semi-patterns, that led to toroidal ideas, that, closely related to Fullers more Euclidean and spherical ideas.  In the prior scenario all of Universe's particles connected ---if not entangled---  via Gravity. Then with my newer toroidal ideas I envisioned Gravity and Dark Energy as two sides of the same coin { torus ergo a toroidal coin, so to speak :--) }.

A little more later on.
#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Rapid energetic fractional decline to a point of rapid energetic re-initiation.

Is the moment of exchange reliant upon a GOD principle?

Could the system fail?
Topic's author
#3
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I dunno Zed you tell me. You know the peter principle dont you?
Topic's author
#4
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
oops, it is Murphy's law I meant. Not peter principle. My bad Zed.


#5
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Well, Murphy's Law is a human adage. 

Will alternative intelligences adopt our propensity for pessimism based on fear of the unknown?


Topic's author
#6
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Well, Murphy's Law is a human adage. 
Yes, I agree.

Will alternative intelligences adopt our propensity for pessimism based on fear of the unknown?
How does AI, pssimism and fear of unknown relate to other post above. I need to see a logical common sense pathway. Please.

....." Rapid energetic fractional decline to a point of rapid energetic re-initiation."...

..." Is the moment of exchange reliant upon a GOD principle? ".....



Topic's author
#7
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
" Considerable Set "

....Macro-infinite, truly non-occupied space > in >

....>  ( macro-irrelevant occupied space too large too infrequent ( > in >

......> > ( almost relevant ( > in >

............> > ( lucidly relevant ( > in > ( almost relevant > in >

.................> > ( micro-irrelevant too small and too frequent ) < < < out

< < < then back out < < <


1] scenario 1 = O|O or as (  ( | )  ) where we have two 5-fold sets  outside OO of flalttened  4-fold set | being tangent to the the two 5-fold sets, O|O,

...or the two 5-fold overlapping each other with the 4-fold set inside of, an at exact middle, of both of the 5-fold sets (  ( | )  ).

The two 5-fold sets are not identical. They are left and right -skew sets of the 56 --- primary great circles--- derived from axis spun icosahedron, as derived from the 4-fold VE set, that contractively torques inward, with left-ward spin or right-spin, ergo, to arrive at two kinds icosahedral resultants 
In following graphic we can vaquely make out the icosahedron in phase b of axis spun torquing motion of the jittebugging VE

There is more to this entropic heat death of Universe scenario, developed by me in 90's. This is just a rough over view the basic concept of a Universe where our observed reality --ex EMRadiation as the 4-fold set--- becomes very large and very flat entropic heat death of Universe, while the gravitaiton sphericals remain on each side and maintain all of the coding of nature in their surface pattering.

The VE has all of its associated 25 great circle patterning also contained in each its four regular triangle sets.
If we were to see mapping of both sets in one regular triangle, shared by both 4-fold 25 and 5-fold left and right-skew, we can see in this following graphic

The graphic shows shaded right-triangle area, but I forget if all of both 4-fold and 5-fold anglur mapping is contained in just the right-triangle, that is why I say the the larger regular triangle that contains 6 of these right-triangles.  Geodesic domes only need the info from one right-triangle to construct the dome.


#8
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
I was addressing Murphy's Law relative to possible future cosmological developments, in which A.I. might play a key role.

Pessimism might or might not be a human failing, so A.I. might be the necessary next evolutionary/cosmological phase, in terms of intellectual development.

Whereby fear of the unknown does not stymie progress.
#9
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4
Pessimism might or might not be a human failing, so A.I. might be the necessary next evolutionary/cosmological phase, in terms of intellectual development.
Well stated!
Topic's author
#10
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I was addressing Murphy's Law relative to possible future cosmological developments, in which A.I. might play a key role.
Murphys law you had not mentioned, I did. AI or not is irrelevant to Murphys law.

Pessimism might or might not be a human failing, so A.I. might be the necessary next evolutionary/cosmological phase, in terms of intellectual development.
Pessimism is irrelevant to Murphys law.

Whereby fear of the unknown does not stymie progress.
Fear of unknown is irrelevant to Murphys law.

Murphys law = anything that can go wrong, within context of eternity, will occur, sooner or later.

Murphys law = anything that can occur, within the context of eternity, will occur, sooner or later.

Inviolate laws and principles supercede Murphys law.

Pessimism and AI are irrelevant to both. Understand Zed?




#11
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
In terms of data input, data assessment and the formulation of data for output, everything is relative. (Understanding)

So, if you mention Murphy's Law in our discourse, I will respond.

In this case, questioning if A.I. is likely to be subject to Murphy's Law, when making comparative assessments relative to cosmological scenarios.

And Murphy's Law basically defines pessimism, and vice versa. An inbuilt expectancy that things will go wrong, rather than an inbuilt expectancy that things will go as planned.

So, I questioned if A.I. was likely to be consistently optimistic in its approach to cosmological/evolutionary progress, relative to how intellect affects material development and therefore how intellect might also affect cosmological scenarios.

Also, neither Murphy's Law, pessimism nor optimism have any relevance to the prospect of eternity, other than as intellectual data assessment concerning the prospect of eternity.

Whereby collectively, cosmological scenarios are not determined by what will be, but by what we think might be. 

And all thought is relative to the device, whether that be organic or other.


Further, fear of the unknown is a human condition consistent with the principle of Murphy's Law.

Wherein we will predict pessimistically, relative to our fear of the unknown.

All of which comes under the relative umbrella of electro-chemical data management.
Topic's author
#12
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
In terms of data input, data assessment and the formulation of data for output, everything is relative. (Understanding)
Murphys law { human adage ] and inviolate laws and principles, as I presented to you are not data. They are Meta--space concepts/intellect.

And Murphy's Law basically defines pessimism, and vice versa. An inbuilt expectancy that things will go wrong, rather than an inbuilt expectancy that things will go as planned.
No it does not. Read above about a Meta-space concept/intellect.

So, I questioned if A.I. was likely to be consistently optimistic in its approach to cosmological/evolutionary progress, relative to how intellect affects material development and therefore how intellect might also affect cosmological scenarios.
Pessimism is attitude that stems from feeling { emotion/soul/heart }. Not intellectual concept except as a word { tool } to express emotion/soul/heart lack of desire, lack of purpose, lack of hope, faith etc.

Also, neither Murphy's Law, pessimism nor optimism have any relevance to the prospect of eternity, other than as intellectual data assessment concerning the prospect of eternity.
False, because again, all pessism and AI, are relative within a context, and I specified what that context is, in the broadest { most inclusive } terms, that, all our body/emotions/soul/heart  are of   a finite, eternally existent, occupied space Universe { Nature }.

Whereby collectively, cosmological scenarios are not determined by what will be, but by what we think might be.
Yes,  a this thread as aplace for cosmological ---- Cosmos/Universe/Nature--- scenarios relating to its existence. Our individual pessimism and AI is irrelevant to the Cosmos/Universe/Nature.

Murphys law and inviolate laws principles are related to directly the duration of Cosmos/Universe/Natures existence

 And all thought is relative to the device, whether that be organic or other.
Your thoughts of cosmological scenarios  are relevant. AI and pessimism are not.

Further, fear of the unknown is a human condition consistent with the principle of Murphy's Law.
Irrelevant to cosmological scenarios

Wherein we will predict pessimistically, relative to our fear of the unknown.
Irrelevant to cosmological scenarios

All of which comes under the relative umbrella of electro-chemical data management.
Zed, your reaching far to stretch out your irrelevance toughts  to any cosmological scenarios

Zed >  ______.__>__.__>___.__>__  > Zed *|* Zed___<____.__<__.__<___.___<_____ Zed



#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Everything is thought.

Even everything that might not be thought, is thought.

Cosmological scenarios are nothing more than thoughts.

Therefore, everything that is contained within, is applicable only to everything that is contained within.

There is currently no way of escaping our internal prison.


EbuccubE................. May you always find contentment within.
Topic's author
#14
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Zed, I dont think much of your thoughts as being a cosmological scenario.

You have ma.y good thoughts, concepts oppinions on various topics.  Not on this one.

E for effort
#15
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Some propose downloading consciousness to a device.

But seems like a prison transfer to me.

Though by then, mine will have shut down and it's housing will have been recycled. 
Topic's author
#16
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Zed, I dont think much of your thoughts as being a cosmological scenario.

You need a consciousness thread. Twoness, > othernerss > awareness > consciousness > etc.

This is far { micro-irrelevant  } to cosmological scenarios.

YOu get a P for persistent
#17
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
A cosmological scenario could be Pink Unicorn people selling ice cream on the planet Blarg.

F for fantasy.

EbuccubE.......K for keep up the good work.
Topic's author
#18
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
F for fantasy.

Your micro-irrelevant consciouness fantasy does not = cosmological anything. If your done wiht this lack of logical common sense Zed, I would like to get back to my past thoughts.

#19
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
I would like to get back to my past thoughts.
I'm sure that you will.

But do you notice from that comment, you are well and truly imprisoned within your own mind.


A.N.T.E.I.W.Y..........Always nice to exchange ideas with you.

Data transfer by the medium of information technology.

Regards

Zed.
Topic's author
#20
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
But do you notice from that comment, you are well and truly imprisoned within your own mind.
False Zed, cause when we listen to others were experiencing their thoughts ergo in their minds, not ours, or at a minimum, a blending of the two, three or more

I have one friend diagnosed autistic and germ-aphobic extreme and OCD extreme.  My other friend says..'I would sure hate to live in his mind'.... and I have to remind him, that, every time we around him were living in his mind, because, he verbalizes this OCD thoughts for five  minutes repetitively out loud for all to hear.

It drove me crazy from day one, and now Ive had to be around them for 2.5 years. 

Also Zed, we are not the same person we were  yesterday, or a week or year or ten years ago. All is constant change/transition.  You need to go back to, and grasp the jitterbug VE, as Fullers dynamic, articulative, operating system of Universe i.e. constant flux/change/transition.


...' start with the whole and no parts can be excluded '.. R B Fuller

When we watch tv, movies or read a book, were living in someone elses mind.  The only imprisonment is that of the finite, occupied space Universe, and its complementary finite set of physical laws and cosmic principles and these complement beginnings and endings [ terminality } to all of individual parts of Universe.





#21
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
False Ebuc.

Think about it.

When you listen to others, you re-interpret sound waves via you auditory receptors.

Or if you read someone's writings, you convert light waves via you optical receptors.

Therefore everything that you experience has to be re-created within yourself.

And so, every reaction to a sensory experience is also created within yourself.
Topic's author
#22
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Therefore everything that you experience has to be re-created within yourself.
Yes, we all mind meld with others, however, unlike  Spock, we just need I ears to have anothers thoughts transferred to our brains.

Then were experiencing and living in their mind when we do, to what ever degree. Same goes for reading a book etc.

We are imprisoned only by what is possible. inviolate physical laws and cosmic principles are eternally beyond, to varying degrees.

Ex it is eternally impossible to consider more that five regular/symmetrical, and convex polyhedra.

three are all triangles { 3 chords },
one all squares { 4 chords } and,
one all pentagons { 5 chords }

We can consider speeds faster than EMRadiation, --in a vacuum--- but only as mathematical fantasy, not as realistic, empirically observed endeavor.

And of course none of this disscussion involves cosmic scenarios to any relevant degree, tho what Ive expressed is true and the latter parts of yours are not true.


#23
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
At least we transfered data.

Which we analysed and responded to.

#2 was a direct repose to the subject of cosmological scenarios.

And we developed corresponding data from there-on.


And I would suggest that experiencing and living in someone else's mind, is a wholly self induced internal experience, that in other circumstances might be regarded as spiritual.

I find the whole concept of existence and reality quite baffling.

The cosmos that we experience is actually an internal simulation, derived and converted from external light sources.
Topic's author
#24
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I find the whole concept of existence and reality quite baffling.

Like most people, that is a resultant of not being able to grasp a finite { occupied space } and eternally regenerative Universe.

Most only want to superficially envision what is more difficult to grasp A spatially infinite occupied space Universe.

This goes to basic of human ignorance.

The cosmos that we experience is actually an internal simulation, derived and converted from external light sources.
I get your internal part. That iologic life.

The simulation is mysterious mystical play on words, concepts etc to keep it all who attempt to enter Zed mind-set off-centered, never really knowing what is what, why, when etc.

An external light source you do not clarify specifically, ergo, were stand around wondering wtf their talking about. More mysticism output by Zed-the-wizard who will never tell their secret knoeledge.



#25
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Concepts all.


Nonetheless, eternally regenerative universe is a scenario that I have been proposing for a long while.

Though I always question whether the system or sequence, is reliant on something more than just universal decline, material re-initiation and material evolution. 

Something more, or GOD principle as I refer to it.

But not actually a floaty about magical bloke.

Which is not to say that floaty about magical bloke couldn't be a metaphor for GOD principle.


My bafflement is with the functionality of living organisms. and their interaction with an assumed environment.

We sense and we assume an accurate interpretation of what might be outside. (Simulation)

Which given our ability to interact with the outside world is a reasonable assumption.

And as you say, most will never question their temporary interaction with the universe.
Topic's author
#26
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Nonetheless, eternally regenerative universe is a scenario that I have been proposing for a long while.
No where in this thread ' Cosmological Scenarios ' have you mentioned "eternally regenerative universe "

Your still stretching out your micro-irrelevant concepts.

Though I always question whether the system or sequence, is reliant on something more than just universal decline, material re-initiation and material evolution. 
Zed, this more wasted mystical play with words  by you.

Something more, or GOD principle as I refer to it.
Meangingless, and youve added nothing in all of your posts to clarify.

My bafflement is with the functionality of living organisms. and their interaction with an assumed environment.
Yeah, well you  did make that distinction from Cosmos, God Universe or anything else prior to this post.

Cosmological infers the most comprehensive whole set. You have none. You have no cosmological scenario.

At best your ego just keeps stretching-out ___.___.___.___ micro-irrelevancies.

You have no cosmological scenario Zed.





Topic's author
#27
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Zed, here is interesting utube of a much greater inclusion of cosmological-like scenarios, --involving consciousness ideas--, that, rather than you the brief and also micro-irrrelevant one.  You need to consideration whats in this vid to broaden your irrelevances to more common relevance humans ancient concepts, that may overlap with some current cosmological scenarios, to varying degrees.

Topic's author
#28
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
More on cosmological consciousness ideas that you Zed, are having difficulty clarifying.

Access to Meta-space mind allows humans the unique ability to conceptualize a finite Universe, and then conceptually place themselves outside of the conceptual Universe, as if they are a creator God, that the holds this conceptual Universe in its* conceptual hands.

.....Creator Godi* ( * U * ) Creator God i.........i.e. Godi { * U * ) not God,  is the creator concept, that I would say is Zed's God principle. Who knows since they never oferf much clarity.

..................space( Godi )space.....

...................Godi{ space }Godi......

....space(> time <) Godi  (> time <) space...

.......space( /\/\/ ) Godi ( /\/\/ )space.....

Oh great Godi, why has thou forsaken us?

Oh wait, now I get it it. Since you Zed, are including the word "simulation", then you must mean Godi is the fantasy computers answer to everything ergo Godi is 42.    ..." In 1997, Major League Baseball honored Jackie Robinson by making his No. 42 the first uniform number to be retired across the sport. "....

 movie 42 is on Netflix  Come to thing of it I could do a cosmological scenario using 6 { purity } * 7 { structural + sysetmic } = 42 ergo,

Meta-space as 6 { 3 + 3 and 4 + 2 },

Meta-space 7 as  60 degree stable structure 3-ness plus unstable 90 degree systemic 4-ness

This would be saying it is all Meta-space mind/intellect/concept ergo Fullers statement, ..." what we have is inter-fering and non-interfering patterns operating in pure principle", or,

jacob bekensteins comment in Scientific American, that, " we appear to be 2D creatures having an illusion of 3D"......

So after 7 days of creation --- see above number 7 and---  , Godi { as number 42 } retired from being the creator? Oh My Godi, have we finally found the secret to life, the cosmos and everything. Ha ha, ....?( * | * )?...... 
#29
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Cosmological infers cosmological and scenario infers a scenario.

Other than that we can only make predictions based upon what we know as of December 2022.

Though if the Universe were to end tomorrow I don't suppose anyone would will have made such an inference yesterday.


I have basic thoughts/ideas, which look at three possibilities pertaining to cosmological outcomes.

1. The automatic regeneration and reactivation of matter.

2. The inspired (GOD principle) regeneration and reactivation of matter. So, GOD principle not necessarily creative, but regenerative.

3. Or a final universal collapse where matter is reduced to an inert state.

That's three very basic cosmological scenarios that most people should be able to grasp.


But what about a primary cosmological scenario?


Topic's author
#30
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
1. The automatic regeneration and reactivation of matter.
Zed, your way out of your league here. YOur missing a whole catagory above. Let me know when you can figure whats missing.

2. The inspired (GOD principle) regeneration and reactivation of matter. So, GOD principle not necessarily creative, but regenerative.
So 15 posts later your back to your non-clarified " God principle ", That is a regurgitation of your first sentence, with added caveat of the God principle is not neccessarily creative. 

Problem is Zed you have yet to clarify what the God principle is  and it has been a week or more now. Stretching micro-irrelevancies still. Maybe your waiting for Christmas to pop it out of bow-tied box. This is getting old Zed. You have no cosmological scenarios or at best a 0.1 value scenario.

3. Or a final universal collapse where matter is reduced to an inert state.

Collapse? Please clarify what you mean. A football player collaspes on the field from exhasustion, then five minutes later back on field after rest and some water or gatorerade.  Oh wait, I see you do state what collapsed state means, it an inert football player on the field i.e. cant move.

So matter exists but isnt moving.  Zed, matter is composed of charge. Charge is inherently dynamic/motion.

Ergo all matter has spin characteristics.  Even frozen ice cream has dynamic properites. Ultra-cold does not ever = truly [ no charge, no spin, no dynamics } inert.

Matter existence is dynamic spin, charge etc, otherwise the word matter is meaningless as is any matter, i.e. if there is no dynamics/motion such does not exist.  All is in motion. Aka energy ergo energetic = dynamic motion.

Define matter. something you not done  ...." physical substance in general, as distinct from mind and spirit; (in physics) that which occupies space and possesses rest mass, especially as distinct from energy."....

There exist no cosmological scenarios of an existent matter, that is not composed of a dynamic/motion of charged spin. No motion, then no matter and no Universe.

Naught is lost or created, only transformed.  Are you familliar with 1st law of conservation?  Apparrently not. Transformation is the process of dynamic/motion of change/transformation, and this takes back to you first sentence in this post, where I point out a whole catagory you appear to not even know exists, ergo, more evidence your clueless with your cosmological scenario.

E { 0.0001 } for effort once again Zed. You could do better but you like purpose ergo hope that motivates you to learn whatever it is you think your talking about with clarity and informed knowledge base. You like to shoot from the top  your  head and superfifically hope you hit something of value.