# Re: To observe is to......EC

```===============================================
STEP 7:  Something from nothing. (the big bang)```
```
U(.) = (*) from previous STEP.
= (()()()()()()()()()().......()()()()())

There is some need to deal with this issue because it leads to the
mathematical drive of EC that we inside see as the second law of
thermodynamics.

NOTES:
1) The axiom set is one single huge fluctuation (*) which I have
previously labelled U and depicted as U(.).

2) The overall 'fluctuation' is the same (a fluctuation!) but different in
that it consists of the temporary coherence of a massive collection of
individual (). The overall process could really be labeled U( as what is
where all the () disperse. In terms of physics you could call this a
single massive 'symmetry breaking' event caused by a single massive
coherence.

3) At the initial point (big bang) there is no structure in U(.) other
than the initial coherence (which can vary throughout but overall still

4) The underlying processes that are the source of each () are, in
essence, deep randomness. Depth unknown. Call the deeper randomness of
which a () is constructed a []. There can be a variable number of [] in a
(). For EC at this stage we don't have to worry about the number of [] in
(). Although it will determine the initial rules of formation.

5) The underlying processes [] can be incoherent, but dispersal of [] from
coherent () will tend to reinforce coherent emergent [] structures back up
into it. Thus the situation can dynamically persist.

6) The reason it happens at all is that a perfect 'nothing', everywhere
and always, requires an infinite amount of energy. Infinities are
impossible, so the something comes from nothing as an 'average' nothing.
'Nothing' can therefore be be viewed as intrinsically unstable. Any
appearance of anything can be regarded as a temporary failure to be
'Nothing'. This sounds nuts but it's consistent with the facts and
logical.

7) The net result is that the dispersal of () partly or fully into [] and
deeper is the natural drive of U(). () Each () can be thought of as a
mathematician. The number of mathematicians in EC is equal to the number
of () that collaborate according to the rules of formation.

At this point and with further thought....EC predicts what we see as
energy, entropy, black holes, background radiation, gravity and the
origins of some of our laws of nature. But that's way too much info and a
side issue. We are really interested in the entire class of possible EC
treated as structure made of change based on an arbitrarily large source
of randomness pumped by the instability of 'Nothing'.
===================================

I think I've blown your brains out enough with this lot.

NEXT
Before rules of formation we have to look at dynamic hierarchies, lossy
and lossless entities and 'symmetry breaking'.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at