bigbrotherdiamond

Hi and thanks for the comment. By "consistency and synchronization of the universe" I mean that everything always appears to obey the laws of physics as far as we know them.

It is seldom questioned that all the components of the universe remain inperfect relativity to each other at all times. Understanding the finer pointsof this relatively is open to hot debate, but few suggest that the nature ofthe universe is inherently chaotic and unpredictable. This is reasonable asscientists have been able to ascertain 'laws' and make 'predictions' regarding avast plethora of observable phenomena over the centuries and so we feel confidentthat all as yet unexplained issues will one day be solved. My question is how is the consistency and synchronization of the universemaintained? I have come up with three possible answers to this question 1. All constituent parts of the universe are able merely by their 'nature'able to maintain consistency and perfect relativity in all circumstances. A neutronis a neutron and so will always react in certain given ways in the present anyother particular particle. When there is no unbalanced force acting upon itretains its nature indefinitely and perfectly without assistance of any kind. Thismight be compared to a dry stone wall where the stones are laid without cement.Each stone has no 'knowledge of its place within the wall or the reason thewall was built; it just remains true to its natures and stays where it is putuntil something moves it. Each of particles that comprise the stone behaves inexactly the same way. This theory works well provided we assume that'corruption' is impossible. However, imagine if some particles were to become 'corrupt' and lose theirconsistency, behave in an 'aberrant' manner. Such aberration would throw everythingelse out relativity and so, a very small discrepancy could cause an anomalywhich might spread and undermine the very existence of the entire universe. Thisis because there is nothing to correct any 'corruption' that may arise. Thetheory only works if we assume that the universe and all its parts behaveperfectly each according to its given nature now and forever more. This may betrue, but it is a big assumption to make. 2. In a program the items of data from which it is composed are stored scatteredaround in way that needs have no particular meaning. The only thing thatmatters is that the 'program' can find the relevant data as and when required.What gives each item it relativity is not where it is stored but the order inwhich the program selects it. In a sophisticated program it should not matterif some items are missing or corrupt as the program will be able to findreplacements that fulfill the same function or something very close it. So, imagine that universe we perceive is actually only a percentage of thetotal data available for selection. Out some vast store of potential forms acertain number are selected as 'perfectly' or 'close to perfectly' suited to beincluded in 'manifest' reality. Next, imagine that these 'selected parts' arestill venerable to 'corruption' and must be regularly checked. To do this a'scan' must operate that checks each and every item of 'selected' data regularly.Items that are corrupt are simply deselected and replaced. This scan would need to move at enormous speed, fast enough get anywhere inthe universe almost instantly. The 'scan' would of course have to scan all the'unselected' data as well so that replacements can be found. If this is truethen time would be in perfect synch no matter how far and fast you travelledand you could never arrive before you left as in so many time travel fictionstories. 3. There is another possible way that the universe might maintain relativityand that is each particle has some kind of 'intelligence'. Each particle can 'remember'its own nature and has some knowledge of its place within at least within itsown subsystem. This is like the cells in living being.

In practical terms time is a measure of change. A clock is a convienient device that 'changes' in an even and visible way that allows arrucate syncronization. If all change was to seize except for the ticking of the clock who would bother checking the time? If the rate of change were to alter equally within our squere of awareness we not know it happened. We can't be sure that change is constant, only that it is consistent.

Hard to see that gravity is 'entropic' as it holds things in place and preserves 'order'.

Your idea of one singular consciousness that 'scans' (vibes doesn't quitemake sense to me) all individual consciousness's (You do say that each consciousnessis unique) is interesting. I would take it one further and suggest that the entirelyof the universe could be a single dot scanning at x /c squared. This would be contraryto Einstein’s law of relativity, which indicates that all matter/energy managesto behave in perfect synchronization merely simply by following it's 'nature'and that the speed of light is the maximum possible speed. This would remove the need for tiresome Sci Fi plots that rely on differentialsin time caused by travelling faster than light as time would always be the samehowever far or fast you could travel. In the age of computers I find it hard notto believe that the universe is a 'program' and all programs require a scan to checkintegrity. So’ yes I think you could be right, and all consciousness’s could created byone single dot of consciousness moving very fast indeed. parts for consitency as is required.

Hi, I'm Big Brother Diamond and my study is physicalrejuvenation. I'm not really a scientist, but I am scientifically minded. Mymain reason for joining is to discus entropy as this is the key to making worksucceed. I am trying torejuvenate my body be evolving my consciousness and have been very successfulin doing this over the last eighteen months. My theory is that evolutionovercomes entropy, not by removing or exporting it, but by leaving it behind. In the case of ahuman we age by approximately 2% per anum (after the age of twenty, this aging being caused by entropic factors in the enviroment and genetically programmed obsolessence) and so to counter this we must evolve the organization of our mind, body, emotional matrix’s by more than this amount. Impossible? Check my youtube to see how I have been progressing. link removed

Some say that entrophy is merely a measuring system, a measure of disparity, chaos, deterioration, and so cannot have an opposite. If we agree to this then attraction can be said to be a measure of attractiveness, or gravily in the broader sense of the word. That would mean that attraction and entropy are two seperate tendencies that have opposite effects, but are not polar opposites, as poles must always be directly linked in some way. Hence, one may have high levels of attraction at the same time as we have high levels of entrophy, or any other imaginable combination. If they were polar opposites then higher entrophy would invariably mean lower attraction and visa versa..