Autor: Physics | Publicado: 2013-09-18T08:46:00-07:00


The hypothesis of Eternity -
Following

Physically, the empty space, the “nothing”, has
two characteristics: the infinite extension (only nothing, or nothing that in
fact means, it is possible to exist everywhere), and continuity (nothing is
equal in nature throughout all places in the universe).&nbsp;
That’s right: the empty space is a continuum.&nbsp;Only then is
it possible to understand and explain how the physics works.&nbsp;The opposite
hypothesis, that space is discrete, discontinuous, granular, is discarded
because it can not explain the existence of the concept of force field, nor the
operation of the principle of the theory of relativity: the perfect physical
equivalence between the concepts of rest and motion.&nbsp;
These two well-defined characteristics, continuity and
extent, from a condition that is very simple, empty space, make any two points
in space vacuum, even if they are very far apart, become permanently united by
luring themselves.&nbsp;
It is the empty space by their physical equality
everywhere, a way united by a continuous tension, of medium modulus well
defined.&nbsp;However, due to its characteristic continuous or present itself without divisions or separations physical absolute, which unites
nothing to nothing, the tension shows empty space a module or intensity
relatively variable around its medium value.&nbsp;
This is the physical effect that allows the existence
of movements.&nbsp;
The existence of nothing that coexists together with
all our colossal Universe, comes the concept that we call empty space.&nbsp;Empty space,
in infinite extension single perfect continuous union arises the concept that we
call tension.The union nothing to nothing (the union of the
empty space), the tension of empty space has a force of magnitude relatively
variable around its medium value, being able to present local oscillations.&nbsp;
At these local variations in the tension of the empty
space, we call movements, and some very specific types of movements, we call waves.&nbsp;
All matter in the universe, and this can be
demonstrated mathematically using Newton’s
Second Law, for example, is nothing more than relative amounts of pure
movement.&nbsp;In Newton’s
Second Law, the amount of matter is always exactly inversely proportional to
the acceleration, which is nothing more than just a well-defined type of motion
or change of its position in relation to space.&nbsp;
Every mass (amount of matter) always has a wave “associated”
themselves, or can be perfectly seen or treated as such without any loss of
conceptual standpoint.&nbsp;
For this complete identity between all concepts of
physics, we can assume without fear of error that the theory of relativity of
Einstein is the perfect state that observers in different situations or states
of motion measurements obtained different amounts of physical concepts which
are founded all in the concept of motion.&nbsp;
If all quantities depend on the physics concept of
motion to exist, it was natural that observers in different situations obtain different measures of these quantities.&nbsp;
A photon which is a light particle or a package,
well-defined wave number (or movement) may occur spontaneously in empty space due
to its tension that arises from it along with their anti-particles, which is
also called photon, so that the two, if put together disappear again.&nbsp;
Two high-energy photons to collide, can turn into a
proton and anti-proton or a neutron and an anti-neuntron, or even into an
electron and an anti-electron or positron.&nbsp;
When a proton binds to a neutron, form the nucleus of a
hydrogen atom.&nbsp;This, by capturing a free electron, forms a hydrogen atom.&nbsp;
This experience happens every day countless times in
the universe.&nbsp;Ridiculously so weak claim suggested by some that all
hydrogen atoms existing in the Universe are remnants of the Big Bang.This fool assumption would only have some value if it were impossible physically the union between a proton to a neutron free today.&nbsp;
In the heart of stars, hydrogen atoms fuse together
every day, in infinite quantities in the Universe, becoming atoms of heavier
elements, such as those that form our bodies and our planet.&nbsp;We are all
made of star dust.


Sunday, May 9, 2010


The hypothesis of Eternity

The hypothesis of the universe is eternal is by
far the least discussed in our time.&nbsp;The immediacy,
consumerism, individualism, selfishness, childishness, which are predominant
features of our current society, surely exert a major neglect by the hypothesis
eternal.&nbsp;

When speaking in the Universe, one of the more strongly
bound to the subject is “the origin of the Universe.”&nbsp;By far, the
hypothesis of creation, motivated or not, occupies the number one spot on the
popular preference.&nbsp;And the hypothesis of the origin of the Universe, for the
case of a scientific evaluation, although enjoy this status, it is the most
absurd, that has no foundation in scientific, logical or rational: a perfect
shot into the water.&nbsp;

All researchers and the authors of the Big Bang theory,
agree that it is a theory that, at any given time, lacks any scientific
foundation.&nbsp;Pure hypothesis.&nbsp;Pure kick.&nbsp;Pure bluff.&nbsp;To summarize, the Big Bang theory, with all its pomp and
circumstance, there is no more “scientific” than the story of Alice in Wonderland.&nbsp;

The way physics works, the fact that all the laws of
physics work everyday always the same way, the insistent repetition and steady
always obtained in all events and physical experiences, is a very strong
argument for the eternity of the Universe.

In fact, very
few people wake up every day hoping that all objects fall towards the roofs of
their houses, or that the water coming out the tap suddenly turns into gold.&nbsp;

Although such events are not physically impossible to
happen, we all know what to expect from physical events that we experience.&nbsp;

Physics is a science 100% conservative.&nbsp;Do not expect
what we call the laws of physics, may be revoked or modified for any reason
whatever.&nbsp;

The theory of relativity of Einstein, one of the
pillars of the explanation of the world, withdrew all the importance of
individuality of all concepts of physics.&nbsp;Made them all,
relatives.&nbsp;

Time, once considered a conductor, a milestone, an
absolute, was reduced to its true condition of relative amount.&nbsp;

Be regarded as valid a discussion about the origin of
the universe, if time itself is a concept that can have not an absolute
validity?&nbsp;

If it is impossible to determine how much time has
passed since the “Origin of the Universe”, since time itself is a concept
totally relative and always depends of the observer that measure to be
defined and there, the origin of the universe can not be seen as an event
whatsoever.&nbsp;If the origin of the universe can not be seen as an absolute
event, it was not the “origin”, and can not be considered as such.&nbsp;

If it is physically impossible that the universe has
had an origin, if the universe never had an origin, it is eternal, repetitive,
cyclical, and it is impossible that in an eternal universe physical phenomena
happen quite unprecedented.&nbsp;It is impossible that there are facts, phenomena, events or
physical experiences unprecedented in a universe that contains the eternity of
time back.&nbsp;How much&nbsp;longer the time, the greater is the likelihood
repetitions of events that occur in a physical universe which laws of physics are impassible to change.&nbsp;

Being eternal the universe, all events, phenomena,
facts or physical experiments therein are also eternal.&nbsp;Everything
repeats itself in endless amount of repetitions.&nbsp;

Welcome to your own eternity.&nbsp;

The concept of “individual” is a concept totally
flawed and lacks foundation.&nbsp;Physically, it is impossible to separate in fact an “individual”
of the universe that surrounds him.&nbsp;The separation, the point where the individual ends to get
around to it, is totally arbitrary, conventional, and not carries no physical
separation insurmountable.&nbsp;For example: living things need air to breathe and survive.&nbsp;The air breathe belongs to the living beings that breathe, or belongs to the universe
that surrounds them? Likewise, the food consume by living beings, belongs to the
living, or belongs to the universe that surrounds them?&nbsp;Unable to
locate a physical separation.&nbsp;No one is a universe in itself, or self-sufficient.&nbsp;

If the concept of individual is totally relative, if
individualization is an abstraction relative, nobody is an individual.&nbsp;Not being “individual” physically, nothing prevents endless repetitions or perfect
copies of “individuals” who have nothing physically individual, infinitely
occurring in the Universe.




(To keep reading in English use the Google translator)