Steve Hulowski

The following is my theory on what my existence is and what it means: There are an infinite number of universes with an infinite number of possibilities. Each universe is a closed system, and it's virtually impossible to move from one to another. It may be impossible to even detect the existence of other universes, because they exist in a world with different laws than ours and in a place that can't even be quantified. There is no "distance" between universes, because there isn't a medium or dimensional fabric between them. Our Universe, like all universes, is fundamentally nothing. Matter balances with anti-matter; electrons balance with protons; even good seems to balance with evil. The principle that energy cannot be created nor destroyed is never violated, because nothing has really existed to begin with. If a person magically creates mater, it's permissible by the laws of the universe provided that an equal amount of anti-mater is produced. I believe that the smallest particles that we know of may contain universes within them. Perhaps particles have a charge due to the properties or laws these universes exhibit. I also believe that our universe is a small particle in a larger universe. The big idea is that everything is infinite. I don't believe in god, but believe that my consciousness and sense of self-awareness will continue even after I die. If who I am is due to the electrical activity in my brain, then I just see it being that this pattern must exist at some point again in some universe. Afterall, infinity is impossible to imagine. It represents endless quantities of everything and surmises every possible state or condition as being a certainty. I view consciousness as a continuum and as a very property of the universe. It's the one thing that all sentient beings have in common. Even though my thoughts and experiences make up the person I am, my sense of awareness is not unique to me. My consciousness faded into existence when I was born and will fade out of existence when I die. After death, I believe that this same self-awareness will fade into existence as something else; the cycle will then continue indefinitely. For every person or living thing that has ever been and ever will be, this single consciousness has transferred through them. In a sense, I see self-awareness and consciousness as a single manifestation that travels through all life-forms—simultaneously, continually, forever. I am just part of this continuum. The illusion will be that after I die, I will gradually wake up as something else, in some other place. To contrast with reincarnation, there are no individual souls moving from one life to the next, nor will life-experiences and memories transfer from one life to the next. There is one soul, and we all share it. We've all been everybody. This soul has been Hitler; it's been a mouse in an underground burrow; it's been me. This single soul will experience every life. We—you and I—will live through every life. If this is the way of the universe, as my theory suggests, then it's prudent to show empathy and compassion for all living things—because this "universal soul" will suffer through the tortures and pleasures of all lives. When a person causes pain to another, the inflictor will and already has experienced the life of the inflected. It's wonderfully liberating to believe I'll live forever and experience the best the universe has to offer, but it's equally terrifying to know I must also share the worst it has to offer. This is still my life, because the wiring in my brain is unique to me and constitutes who I am. It gives rise to my perception of reality. My thoughts, experiences, memories, feelings, desires, and personality are all mine alone, and are a product of the waves of electricity flowing through the billions of synapses/neurons in my brain. When I die, the only thing left of me will be the impact I've had on the world--including the people I've touched and influenced, the ideas I've passed along, and the memories I'm part of. Everything that made me who I am will be otherwise lost. I will not continue in some afterlife with the same psyche, mind, and memories of who I was in tow. The single soul that is this "perception of existence" will just continue to experience every life. It's the only part of me – of us all - that will continue. This single soul of the universe will propagate throw infinitum, through the continuum that is consciousness. Just as the universe is infinite, so it must be that consciousness is too. So that's what I think. I emphasize the word "think" because, just like everyone else in this world, I don't know the answers. No one can know "the answers". I'm agnostic in that I see knowing the true answer to questions like "what happens after you die" as being unanswerable. What are your deepest notions about our existence, consciousness, and what happens after death?

Thanks for the reply. So if I understood correctly, the reason these subatomic particles do not possess infinite energy and/or mass is because they are traveling just shy of the speed of light "c"? This is the other thing about relativity that confuses me (reference frames and time dilation): I'm told that if someone blasts away (I'll call this person Steve) from Earth and approaches light speed, that when Steve returns he'll have aged less than everyone else. Relative to observers on Earth, Steve's reference frame has slowed down. Now wouldn't Steve likewise see the Earth moving away from him at light speed? If velocity is only a "relative" phenomenon, why is it that one reference frame slows down but the other does not? I like to use the bus analogy; whereas, when you're sitting on a bus when it starts to accelerate, you can get the brief feeling that it is the vehicle next to you that is moving and not yourself. Likewise, if two people, say Steve and John were in the abyss of space in their own separate space ships (ie. no visible light except from their ships to serve as reference to) and Steve sees John start to move away from him and eventually approach light speed, how can he know if it is himself moving or not? The only difference I could see is that only one of them will experience the acceleration. Is that what makes the difference as to who ages faster than the other--who experiences the acceleration? If acceleration is taken out of the picture, and both Steve and John pass each other pass each other at some constant velocity, which one is aging faster? They can only measure their velocity relative to each other. They could then rondevu by sharing the amount at which they decelerate and then meet up for coffee in either ship. In this case, they would have both experienced the same acceleration. Which one has aged more? Newton viewed the universe as though objects moved relative to some universal reference frame--as if there was a grid in the background that all objects (solar systems, galaxies ect) move relative to. Relativistic physics says otherwise, in that velocities are only relative to other objects. With the later being the accepted theory, why is time-dilation experienced differently for Steve and John without this "universal reference frame"?

Relativity has always been a stumbling block for me. No matter how much I read about and try to understand it, I find myself with more questions than when I started. Here are a few that have been picking my brain recently: It's my understanding that as any mass approaches the speed of light, its mass approaches infinity--or do you just say that its energy approaches infinity? I get confused with the mass energy relationship when something is accelerated to near light speeds. If mass and/or energy approach infinity with increasing velocity then shouldn't subatomic particles, such as neutrinos, possess infinite mass? Do they travel just shy of the speed of light? If an object increases in mass as it is accelerated faster, what happens to its gravitational field strength? You'd think any mass traveling at light speed would be a moving black hole.

Hey there, and welcome to the site. This is actually my first post as well. You sound very like how I was back in high school (I'm 28 now). I was absolutely fascinated by science, and would read books on advanced topics like Relativity and Quantum Mechanics all the time. Most of these books were written for "the lamend", but it got to the point where that just wasn't enough for me. I wanted a deep, comprehensive understanding of some of these subjects, so I embarked on a quest to self teach myself physics. This quest lasted about five minutes. I signed out some textbooks to study over the summer (college level), and was immediately overwhelmed and frustrated by my inability to quickly make sense of the complexity of the equations that lay in front of me. This caused me to loose some of my motivation and interest in science altogether - for some time. In hindsight, I wish I had just continued to read "general overview" type books and allowing the finer details to be filled in as I progressed through my studies at school. It's nearly impossible to attain a deep understanding of the intricies of Calculus without having the foundational Algebra skills you learn in your senior year of High School first. That doesn't mean you can't read about and understand Calculus in concept. The same applies to Relativity, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics, ect. You won't be able to understand the advanced math in these subjects until you've mastered Calculus, but you can still learn about them in concept. Having that general concept of a subject layed out in your mind gives you an excellent framework in which to understand those finer details when you do learn them. The details also become easier to remember in the long term because you'll have been able to put it all into greater context. Afterall, our memories work by associating new things we learn to things we already know. So if you want to get "ahead of the game", I would recommend that you keep learning everything you can about the subjects that interest you, but focus on your higher level of understanding for the time being. Leave the details for later. If your goal is to be able to solve Calculus equations before your senior year, you should work adhead through the math curriculum on your own, but do it in sequence. Once you have that foundational framework of Algebra to build upon, you'll be a position to learn Calculus "with ease". If you set your sights too high intially, you could risk feeling deflated and suffer from a total loss of motivation and interest like I did. Of course, I'm back to loving physics and science again! Just make sure that you're enjoying what you're doing. Good Luck!