On 2/20/2012 5:28 PM, John Mikes wrote:
where has that "primordial singularity" come from? and what "expansion"?
I like to use terms beyond hearsay or fantasy. (Of course MY narrative is fantasy based on hearsay, - B U T
it makes sense in its cosequences, I think.)
John M

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com <mailto:whatsons...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    On Feb 20, 4:30 am, Kim Jones <kimjo...@ozemail.com.au
    <mailto:kimjo...@ozemail.com.au>> wrote:
    > Probably. From a friend of mine on Facebook: "Is it possible
    that the notion of the universe expanding is really an illusion
    based on the fact that WE are shrinking?"
    > Perhaps this idea might be used as a "stepping-stone" to a
    better idea. Go on, have a laugh if you want but tell me why this
    cannot be in any sense possible. Conversely, tell me why it might
    be possible if you think so.
    > Kim Jones

    I think that is not only possible, but I think that it has to be the
    case. I call my cosmological origin myth 'The Big Diffraction' rather
    than the Big Bang for just that reason. If spacetime is created by the
    expansion of the primordial singularity, then that means that there
    was neither space nor time before the moment of 'expansion'. Therefore
    we, and everything in the entire universe was, is, and always will be
    physically within the event horizon of the big bang. It cannot be
    expanding outside of its own event horizon, so it is space and time
    which are surging inward, or within-ward.

    We see it as an expansion and forward arrow of time, but that would
    make sense since that would be the perspective of a subjective
    experience within the spacetime implosion. Objectively, it is the
    ratio between mass and space in the universe which is shrinking as
    more space is created through the passage of more time (or time is
    created through the multiplication of space). The shrinking mass ratio
    can also be thought of as energy's entropic exhaust. Events/
    experiences build significance (meaning, sequence) and kick out
    entropy (space). This is what the universe is; a testing ground for
    significance vehicles.



Hi All,

Question: Assuming COMP and all its implications are true, what does it tell us about the appearance of an "initial singularity" and "expansion"? I am trying to understand what is the motivation for Arithmetic bases Realism to have a physical world. I will tentatively accept Bruno's idea but a question keeps nagging at me: Why bother with an appearence?



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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to