http://studios.amazon.com/scripts/1599

and scroll halfway down the page. Hope you like it!

]]>Does the simple modification of E=mc2 (E=mc ^ 2) to E=m exponent 1+0 (E=m ^ 1+0) extend Albert Einsteinâ€™s genius, which he claimed was not genius but intense curiosity and imagination, infinitely beyond the 20th century?

Removing E=m from both equations means c2 (to be precise, c ^ 2) = ^ 1+0

Multiplying each side by base n (any number) gives us

nc2 = n ^ 1+0 i.e. nc2 = n

Dividing both sides by n gives c2 = 1, therefore c also equals 1

Tradition says c is the speed of light. If c has the same value as c ^ 2 then the velocity of light in a vacuum must be a universal constant and since it cannot change, space-time has to warp: producing things like gravity, gravitational lenses, black holes and time travel.

Solving E=mc2 for mass (m) results in m=E/c ^ 2

Since c ^ 2 = ^ 1+0

m = E/^ 1+0

Multiplying each part of each element by base n: nm = nE/n ^ 1+0

nm = nE/n

m = E/1 = E

Therefore, the mass of the expanding universe can be thought of as pure energy.

If we interpret m=E (1m=1E) as meaning all the mass and energy in the universe forms a unit, we wonâ€™t be able to think of any of the masses and energies composing the universe as separate. Every planet, star, magnet, beam of light, etc. would be part of a unification comparable to a hologram (but a very special hologram, including all forms of electromagnetism as well as gravitational waves which give objects mass. In September 2008, renowned British astrophysicist Professor Stephen Hawking bet US$100 that the Large Hadron Collider would not find the Higgs boson, a theoretical particle supposed to explain how other particles acquire mass. Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves, and measurements on the Hulse-Taylor binary-star system resulted in Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor being awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993 for their work, which was the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves).

The seeming fact that particles can communicate instantly over billions of light years (are entangled – a process that appears to have operated in the entire universe forever) also seems to support the holographic principle and makes these lines relevant – another effect of the universe being a unification having zero separation is that experiments in quantum mechanics would show that subatomic particles instantly share information even if physically separated by many light years (experiments conducted since the 1980s repeatedly confirm this strange finding). This is explicable as 2 objects or particles only appearing to be 2 things in an objective, â€śout thereâ€ť universe. Theyâ€™d actually be 1 thing in a unified, â€śeverything is everywhere and everywhenâ€ť universe. If the universe is a hologram with each part containing information about the whole, the instant sharing of information over many light-years loses its mystery.

Light can attract and repel itself like electric charges and magnets (according to Discover magazineâ€™s “Top 100 Stories of 2009 #83: Like Magnets, Light Can Attract and Repel Itself” by Stephen Ornes, from the January-February 2010 special issue; published online December 21, 2009 – in July 2009, electrical engineer Hong Tang and his team at Yale University in the USA demonstrated that, on silicon chip- and transistor- scales, light can attract and repel itself like electric charges/magnets). Therefore, it must be true to say electrically charged particles and magnets can attract and repel like light (electric/magnetic attraction/repulsion would, similarly to light, occur only on microscopic scales if the universe did not have an electronic foundation in which it was composed of silicon chip- and transistor- scales: more will be said about this later). We have known for ages they attract/repel â€“ but now we know they do it â€ślike lightâ€ť, can we extend this phenomenon from quantum mechanicsâ€™ wave-particle duality (in the case of electric charges and light) to universe-wide wave-particle duality (in the case of magnets and light)? If the magnets we can see and touch behave like light, is it not possible that every object in the universe (from a small magnet to an enormous planet or star) behaves like light â€“ making the universe a hologram.

Since m=E, we can think of c as not merely representing the speed of light but as symbolic of the speed of universal expansion (c=Hubble Constant or 299,792.458 kilometres per second = approx. 70 km/sec/megaparsec). What can it mean if c and c2 both equal 1 in the context of cosmic holographic expansion? Answering this is impossible unless we look back at the work of Albert Einstein. That work leads to the conclusion – if c has the same value as c ^ 2 then the velocity of light in a vacuum must be a universal constant and since it cannot change, space-time has to warp: producing things like gravity, gravitational lenses, black holes and time travel. Applied to cosmic holographic expansion, the conclusion is â€“ if c has the same value as c ^ 2 then expansion (whether positive, zero or negative) obviously always exists and space-timeâ€™s warping produces the weird phenomena modern science proposes, like higher dimensions and hyperspace and time travel and parallel universes. Let’s see where things lead if we assume c and c2 both equalling 1 means that the future universe, whose rate of expansion is the square of todayâ€™s, is existing at the same time as todayâ€™s â€“ and if we think of present expansion as c2, that the present universe whose rate of expansion is the square of one in the past is unified with the past one. For a start, such an assumption would be consistent with “dark energy” causing expansion to accelerate.

We can, of course, write that c2 equals a number, any number (c2 = n)

Then c = square root n (n ^ Â˝)

But c = 1

Therefore n ^ Â˝ = 1

n = 1 ^ 2

n = 1

n = c

and 1 = c ^ 2

n = c ^ 2

Since c and c2 both equal n, any past or future universe (whatever the rate of expansion, even if zero or negative) exists at the same time as ours. So a simple modification of Einsteinâ€™s E = mc ^ 2 to E = m ^ 1+0 implies that our holographic universe is generated and supported by binary digits (1’s and 0’s). What line of thinking could justify such an apparent leap? The universeâ€™s underlying electronic foundation (which makes our cosmos into a partially-complete unification, similar to 2 objects which appear billions of years or billions of light-years apart on a huge computer screen actually being unified by the strings of ones and zeros making up the computer code which is all in one small place) would make our cosmos into physicsâ€™ holy grail of a complete unification if it enabled not only elimination of all distances in space and time, but also elimination of distance between (and including) the different sides of objects and particles. This last point requires the universe to not merely be a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; but to be a unified whole that has â€śparticlesâ€ť and â€śwavesâ€ť built into its union of digital 1â€™s and 0â€™s (or its union of qubits â€“ quantum binary digits). The feedback of the past and future universes into the unified cosmos’s electronic foundation would ensure that both past and future could not be altered.

Carl Sagan (who was an American astronomer, astrophysicist, cosmologist and author) said there is “… no centre to the expansion, no point of origin of the Big Bang, at least not in ordinary three-dimensional space.” (p. 27 of “Pale Blue Dot” – Headline Book Publishing, 1995). Does this mean the Big Bang (or for our purposes, the binary 1’s and 0’s) would exist outside space-time in what we might call 5th dimensional hyperspace? The revised equation also says this universe is a unification, permitting time travel into both past and future (because any past or future universe exists at the same time as ours â€“ a twist on the concept of parallel universes). Repeated experimental verification of Einsteinâ€™s Relativity theory confirms its statement that space and time can never exist separately but form what is known as space-time. So space, like time, must also be a unification whose separation can be reduced to zero. This suggests that intergalactic travel might oneday be completed extremely rapidly.

From 1929 til his death in 1955, Einstein worked on his Unified Field Theory

with the aim of uniting electromagnetism and gravitation. Future achievement of this means warps of space (gravity, according to General Relativity) between

spaceships/stars could be attracted together, thereby eliminating distance. And “warp drive” would not only come to life in future science/technology … it would be improved tremendously, almost beyond imagination. This reminds me of the 1994 proposal by Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre of a method of stretching space in a wave which would in theory cause the fabric of space ahead of a spacecraft to contract and the space behind it to expand. Therefore, the ship would be carried along in a warp bubble like a person being transported on an escalator, reaching its destination faster than a light beam restricted to travelling outside the warp bubble. There are no practical known methods to warp space â€“ however, this extension of the Yale demonstration in electrical engineering may provide one.

Letâ€™s return to Relativityâ€™s statement that space and time can never exist separately, therefore warps in space are actually warps in space-time: Eliminating distances in space also means â€śdistancesâ€ť between both future and past times are eliminated – and time travel becomes reality. Can anything more specific about the mechanics of time travel be stated here? If we get into a spaceship and eliminate the distance between us and a planet 700 light-years away, it’ll not only be possible to arrive at the planet instantly but we’ll instantly be transported 700 years into the future. On page 247 of “Physics of the Impossible” by physicist Michio Kaku (Penguin Books – 2009), it’s stated “astronomers today believe that the total spin of the universe is zero”. This is bad news for mathematician Kurt Godel, who in 1949 found from Einstein’s equations that a spinning universe would be a time machine (p. 223 of “Physics of the Impossible”). Professor Hawking informs us that â€śall particles in the universe have a property called spin which is related to, but not identical with, the everyday concept of spinâ€ť (science is mystified by quantum spin which has mathematical similarities to familiar spin but it does not mean that particles actually rotate like little tops). Everyday spin might be identical to Godelâ€™s hoped-for spinning universe. If the universe is a Mobius loop (a Mobius loop can be visualised as a strip of paper which is given a half-twist of 180 degrees before its ends are joined), the twisted nature of a Mobius strip or loop plus the fact that you have to travel around it twice to arrive at your starting point might substitute for the lack of overall spin. Then the cosmos could still function as a time machine. We’ve seen how it permits travel into the future. We can journey further and further into the future by going farther and farther around the Mobius Universe. We might travel many billions of years ahead – but when we’ve travelled around M.U. exactly twice, we’ll find ourselves back at our start i.e. we were billions of years in the future â€¦ relative to that, weâ€™re now billions of years in the past.

And according to Michio Kaku on p. 316 of “Physics of the Impossible” – Penguin Books, 2009 – “… the inverse-square law (of famous English scientist Isaac Newton [1642-1727]) says that the force between two particles is infinite if the distance of separation goes to zero”. Space-timeâ€™s being a unification whose separation can be reduced to zero also suggests the existence of an infinitely powerful, and infinitely intelligent (since those particles could be brain particles), God. Since the distance of separation is zero, the universe must be unified with each of its constituent subatomic particles and those particles must follow the rules of fractal geometry being similarly composed of space and time and hyperspace. Unification of the cosmos with its particles is an insurmountable challenge to our bodily senses and their extensions, scientific instruments â€“ as is existence of zero separation between us and a starâ€™s gravity, heat etc. If we could see the universe exclusively with our minds, we’d see that these insurmountable challenges are indeed possible if we live in a non-materialistic holographic universe (combining gravitational with electromagnetic waves) controlled by the magic of computers.

Some people will criticise my mathematical approach. Theyâ€™ll say my article is invalidated by my selective use of the equations which, theyâ€™ll contend, are too simple to convey anything of importance. But if you want to say something like â€śThe sky is blueâ€ť, you need enough intelligence to mentally sort through an entire dictionary in a tiny fraction of a second and select the 4 little words that express what you know. This article is not wild speculation â€“ it is a jigsaw â€¦ combining a recent demonstration in electrical engineering at Yale University, Professor Ed Fredkinâ€™s belief that the universe is a computer, Professor David Bohmâ€™s belief that the universe is a hologram, Professor Stephen Hawkingâ€™s lack of belief in the existence of the Higgs boson, the Large Hadron Collider, the work of Nobel Laureates Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor for their discovery of the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves, the work of Yakir Aharonov and John Cramer and John Dobson and Neil Turok and Paul Steinhardt, the discovery of dark energy, Carl Saganâ€™s statement that there is no point of origin of the Big Bang, Miguel Alcubierreâ€™s â€śwarp driveâ€ť, modern scienceâ€™s popularising science in books for the public as well as its openness to higher dimensions and hyperspace and time travel and parallel universes, Isaac Newtonâ€™s religious belief, Benoit Mandelbrotâ€™s fractal geometry, Edwin Hubbleâ€™s discovery of universal expansion, mathematician Kurt Godel who tried to use Einsteinâ€™s equations to turn the universe into a time machine, and Albert Einsteinâ€™s Theories of Special and General Relativity.

Perhaps the atheists among my readers are thinking it canâ€™t be denied that these paragraphs imply the possibility of humans from the distant future time-travelling to the distant past and using electronics to create this particular subuniverse’s computer-generated Big Bang. Maybe any limits on trips to the future or past are overcome by travelling to other universes and linking their “eliminated distances” to those in this universe. This linkage requires all laws of physics etc. to be identical everywhere. In a so-called multiverse consisting of parallel universes where things have the potential to be slightly different in each universe, the link could be broken because we might find ourselves trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

An accomplishment such as this would be the supreme example of â€śbackward causalityâ€ť (effects influencing causes) promoted by Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer and others. However, recalling Isaac Newtonâ€™s inverse-square law and what it says about the force between two particles being infinite if the distance of separation goes to zero means there’s still room for God because God would be a pantheistic union of the megauniverse’s material and mental parts, forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification. Subuniverse? Megauniverse? What am I talking about?

A megauniverse is hinted at by EinsteinÂ´s equations as well as cosmologyÂ´s Steady-State theory, which say the universe has always existed and will continue forever. Einstein spoke of a “static” universe (which accurately describes a megauniverse that has no limits in space and has always existed/will continue forever), but he thought of this local branch as static, and rightly called it his greatest mistake since the local universe (our subuniverse) is now known to have had a beginning and to be expanding. Each subuniverse and its region of space-time is created from a big bang, but the megauniverse they belong to has no beginning and no end. And it maintains its average density through continuous “creation” (actually, recycling) of matter via the small amount from a preceding universe which is used to initiate expansion of its successor. This steady-state, or static, megauniverse would have its tendency to collapse (from, according to the viewpoint that only one time exists at any instant, ever-increasing gravitational attraction) always exactly balanced by, again from the viewpoint that all times cannot exist at once, the ever-increasing expansion of the universes it contains. The notion that contained universes that are forever expanding would somehow “burst” a static, steady-state megauniverse mistakenly assumes the megauniverse possesses a finite size; and it also reverts to our everyday experience that only one time exists at any instant (forgetting that all times exist and the megauniverse therefore accommodates not just some, but all, extents of expansion). Expanding subuniverses reminds me of the claim by cosmologists Paul J. Steinhardt and Neil Turok that the Big Bang which created our universe was triggered by a collision between our cosmic brane (or membrane) and a neighbouring one. The only essential difference between our hypotheses is that I believe collisions between neighbouring universes are the result, not the cause, of big bangs. We can regard the cosmic hologram and the megauniverse as examples of invariance (the quality of not changing) and the hologramÂ´s relativistic property of appearing different from differing vantage points as represented by the expanding universes with their big bangs.

—————————————————————————————-

]]>