Section 28 (last updated 1.22.2021)
Black hole wormhole 11
——-
-Wormhole
The Modern explanation says a “wormhole” is a “ connection between widely separated regions of space-time.” Two places at different locations within the fabric of spacetime are connected and made into the same point, so that the amount of time it would take to travel from one point to the other, is reduced to 0.
Materialist scientist explain that a wormholes can be created when enough energy, equal or greater to energies of atomic bombs, wraps or distorts spacetime. two masses apply enough force on space-time to create a tunnel connecting distant points.
How can a large amount of energy cause a wormhole? There are two dimensions of magnitude that energy travels in spacetime. First, when a large amount of energy is exposed, it travels in the macroscopic scale. When energy travels in the macroscopic dimension, it is occupying the greatest volume of space at the shortest time. The energy is as dispersed as possible, least concentrated, and occupying the greatest area of space.
Second, when energy is dispersed in the microscopic scale, it behaves inverse, or opposite to the way it appears in the macroscopic scale. In the microscopic dimension, energy has the greatest amount of density within the smallest area of space. It is most compact, dense, and concentrated. In the sequence of time, the maximum number of events are concurring during the fastest time.
The inverse magnitudes of energy tell us how wormholes actually behave. In order for a wormhole to effectively reduce the time naturally required to travel between two distant points in space, the time frame itself disclosing the object undergoing the time travel, must somehow be separated and stopped. In order to achieve this process, the space in which the object is situated, must be isolated from the overall space that it must travel to achieve time teleportation.
Traveling into the distant future relates to time-dilation effect of Special Relativity, which states that a moving clock appears to tick more slowly the closer it approaches the speed of light. In other words, the notion of objects are slowed down as they approach the speed of light, the reason for this is because the speed of light is the limit, beyond it, no event can take place, so as the observer comes closer to that limited, they ultimately have a greater conception of all the events that are happening deeper within the light cone of spacetime. This effect has been overwhelmingly supported by experimental tests, applies to all types of clocks, including biological aging.
“If an object is to depart from the earth in a spaceship that could accelerate continuously at a comfortable rate g (an acceleration that would produce a force equal to the gravity at the earth’s surface), one would begin to approach the speed of light relative to the earth within about a year. As the ship continued to accelerate, it would come ever closer to the speed of light, and its clocks would appear to run at an ever slower rate relative to the earth.
negative energy
In quantum theory, the uncertainty principle allows the vacuum of space to be filled with virtual particle-antiparticle pairs which appear spontaneously and exist for only a short time before, typically, annihilating themselves again. Some of these virtual particles can have negative energy. Their behaviour plays a role in several important phenomena,
Negative energy is characterized by “virtual” particles because they are the reaction to any decay, or ceasing into nothing of physical objects. Whenever an object no longer exists, or it’s energy enters into nothing, this is not a negative determination, in the sense that it is not the lacking or reducing of an action to nothing, but rather follows from it it a positive determination because in the place of the deceased mass of energy, springs forth an effect of “negative” energy. Energy is negative because we do not observer it to exists on its own unless as a reaction from the dissipation of an already pre-existing ordinary matter or positive energy. Energy is positive because it already occupies an evident existence picked out by our sense perception and it enters into the opposite of itself after a discernible length of time.
how negative energy contributes as a source for time travel? The answer to this question is because negative energy has no mass
energy can be defined as being negative, but it has no physical meaning since a potential energy is always defined up to a constant
Casimir effect, two flat plates placed very close together restrict the wavelengths of quanta which can exist between them. This in turn restricts the types and hence number and density of virtual particle pairs which can form in the intervening vacuum and can result in a negative energy density. Since this restriction does not exist or is much less significant on the opposite sides of the plates, the forces outside the plates are greater than those between the plates. This causes the plates to appear to pull on each other, which has been measured. More accurately, the vacuum energy caused by the virtual particle pairs is pushing the plates together, and the vacuum energy between the plates is too small to negate this effect since fewer virtual particles can exist per unit volume between the plates than can exist outside them.
Negative energy appears in the speculative theory of wormholes, where it is needed to keep the wormhole open. A wormhole directly connects two locations which may be separated arbitrarily far apart in both space and time, and in principle allows near-instantaneous travel between them.
warp drive
A theoretical principle for a faster-than-light (FTL) warp drive for spaceships has been suggested, involving negative energy. The Alcubierre drive comprises a solution to Einstein’s equations of general relativity, in which a bubble of spacetime is moved rapidly by expanding space behind it and shrinking space in front of it
The whole universe is the idea exhibited as object.
The importance of exploring the physical nature of the universe, corresponds to the notion of the “idea” of the object, or in other terms, the concept is called “object-idea“. What does it mean for an ”idea” to have a physical nature, how does that the structure of the object relates to the expression of an idea? The usage of the term “idea” in the context of philosophical domain, is similar the definition of the word in language. Object and idea are two sides of the same coin. Object is simply the matter and idea is the essence.
The modern phenomenon known as the “wormhole” indicates very important insights about the nature of gravitational field, which fundamentally concerns the structure of the universe. The idea of the wormhole however insinuates something much more fundamental and profound then the concepts is initially aware of. The wormhole is normally defined as “a hypothetical connection between widely separated regions of spacetime”.
Modern physics conceptualizes a wormhole as the connection between two finite points “bending” the spacetime fabric so as to condense time. It is often rightly admitted that this understanding of the wormhole is wholly limited and in some sense fictitious. First, it is assumed that the regions of spacetime connected by the point is a finite region. This is based on the assumption that between any two points there is a finite space between them. This abstracts from the concept of spacetime a finite plane and assumes that this plan can be connected by a point. It makes sense that when two points further away from each other are brought closer, the space between them becomes shorter and therefore condenses the time traveled. If I take the series ABCD and take away BC it would be faster for A to arrive at D.
Although this seems simple there is however a problem. Just because there is a space that corresponds to the finitude of the distance between the two points, that is not the same to mean that the space itself can be made into the finitude of the points. Two points in space with relative distance is not the same as saying space is the points with the relative distance. In the latter case the space would be the same unity having two aspects of it whereas before it is two distnct points whose only relation is that they are separated by something also distinct, their space. Spacetime remains objectively independent from any relative objects, the place where all things exists. Spacetime encompass a relative relation between specific points in it but spacetime is a universal principle remains independent from any specific object in it, and cannot be said to involve a specific position in itself.
This is perhaps a more accurate illustration of the wormhole because spacetime is spherical and any two relative point in it can only alter their distance from each other through transformation. (Use inversion geometry here) It goes in so that it can come out, except that it comes out excalty from the same place it went in.
The illustrations of a wormhole is in fact the form by which an idea constitutes a future event for the present moment. Hegel uses the term the “Idea” not to mean something hypothetical like a recommendation or a suggestion to a possible course of action, which although can lead to something practical is itself an opinion about some external courses. The idea is rather a substance or a nature in the universe, like an element is, specifically a substance for time, and in this way it is more appropriately defined as an aim or purpose, but even this remains ambiguous, but at least the course of action as a duration towards something is defined by it being an aim. And this definition of an idea peaks when it is taken as the “point”, as in the case when we say, “that’s the whole point” or “there is no point” as to assert that one is not receiving the meaning in someone’s thought process alluded in their proposition.
The reason we associate an idea as being a point is not merely figuratively speaking, means not only metaphorically but also something representing forms that are recognizably derived from life. The idea is an actual point in nature, not merely its representation as we say “the idea about something”, but that which a representation is moving towards being, i.e, the idea-l. but unlike a spatial point which is perceivable as a distinct place in a 3 dimensional Cartesian plane, it is an ideal point, meaning it is a point of time a duration is reaching towards but not arriving. More specifically speaking the idea is a future point of time relative to a present moment, it is the point the present moment is extending or moving towards.
The idea as a future point to the present is however itself being extended into a singularity, and so as the present extends into the future while the future is part of a singularity, that is, the future is process for the generation of possibilities, or that the singularity itself is indeterminacy in each determined object. In time duration begins from a point, that it is itself a point, and continues into a point, that is, internally itself into a point, that’s how it maintains the identity of the same duration, the point becomes than a passage from which a 3 dimensional field of possibilities can extend outwards.
The external side we perceive and take to be the place where a point begins it’s duration, is in fact a result that is sprouted out of a point that is identical with itself which formed itself into a wavelength duration, or a two dimensional plain. And it is this plain that is at the same time invertedly extending into a particular point on its surface, which so far is identical with itself as a point, is whatever it becomes.
The environment goes into the mind of the individual so that the individual wakes up in the environment they are in, so that the environment in the individual is changing towards being the environment the individual is within.
The present moment spirals into the mind where the idea is a point of the future, we literally one day “wake up” into the future. The idea is the point the future is extending into. But we have a reversed conception, which is the spatial conception. Spatially this process is different because when we take an object as a reference point in a plane, extension is just motion away from the object. But that object being a centre point in a plane, being the reference frame, that which an event happens to, is where the environment warps into in order to continue as experience.
Time moves internally unlike space which moves externally. Time is a fulfillment process, there is no externality to time, we say everything is governed by time or has a time, means that time discloses the thing, any external entity is subject to time because it
Every item goes through an infinity not by being every other item but by not being every other item. Every item goes through an infinity by being not every other item.
You look out and see an object, but in that object is a mind looking out, or the rational form it exhibits, both mean the same. But these minds are in conflict based on what they each express as their object, their objects are therefore in conflict. However it is the same mind behind the scene except there is a part of it that insists on being not the same and fixates on being the object while the other wonders to what degree will it’s counterpart insists on the illusion that it is not the same being its object.
Pure perception
Empiricist assume perception is first in the sense that without perception the mind is “blind” mechanical action or an inanimate object governed by the laws of nature, like a leaf thrown around by the wind. They mean that without perception the mind does not see but perception is a mental precept meaning that it is a product of the mind. The mind already sees but not in the way perception makes it see, perception is a developed form of the mind seeing its object, it is an explicitly conscious form of seeing. But the mind naturally has an intuitive way of seeing its thought.
Knowing is the more basic form of seeing, apperception, when the mind presents an imagery thought to the perception, that object is known, perception is a form of knowledge, this means that it is not the eyes that allow the brain to see but it is the brain that uses the eyes for sight, the mind already sees by virtue of having knowledge of its object, but the eyes are a more clear and direct form of this perception. Evidence for this is that we have sight of our thoughts as much as perceiving objects external to us. And these sights of thought whether it be in the form of mental imagery or intuition are not directly perceived by the eyes.
When the mind looks out through the sense organs it does not only perceive but also makes a judgment. The sense organs are neutral only passing down information to their best ability. The capacity to make a judgment about what is being perceived is psychological and is related to the “ego” which is the part of the minds way of maintaining a bias towards controlling its living subsistence. Perception is related but independent from the ego and on its own it’s just the facility of consciousness. In other words perception is pure and is natural product of the observer phenomenon relation, it is a natural continuity.
Would you rather be a happy swine or a dissatisfied Socrates?
This is actually a more deeper predicament in philosophy than the satire nature of the question suggests. John Stuart Mill famously writes that “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question.” This quote talks about having objective knowledge is greater than being ignorant even in the sacrifice of pleasure. The life of a human being involved more variables than a pig and even thought it is for this same reason of having more variables that makes Socrates dissatisfied and the swine satisfied, it is better to be Socrates because the assumption is that humans have more freedom to operate within knowledge of their variability and therefore have more potential, while the pig is limited to a set of variables even though they are satisfied within those conditions.
Objectively speaking this different in development between man and pig is evidently makes one greater than the other since one has proved to have more potential. However we do not see them both as forms of consciousness that have determined their conditions one has man and one as pig. Man and pig are living in completely different realities and just like man looks at a pig and does not wish to be that the pig is likewise more content in their circumstances than those of man. The pig is a manifestation of a specific kind of consciousness that made a realization that no matter what circumstances it is in, take the most vil conditions, it can still find great pleasure in those and thrive. In this sense it has figured something out that man refuses to except. Now it maybe in this refusal for man to subject himself to those vile conditions of a pig that makes him greater, nevertheless the pig is experiencing a reality altogether completely different and only physically parallel to man, and in fact it is so good for the pig that it became good in a different sense for man, we thrive off their bodies by consuming pork.
Take the reality of a pig for instance and compare it to a maggot and it will be more developed in the same way man is more developed than the pig since the life of a pig involves more variables of relations than maggots and is a more complex being both in behaviour and physiological structure. If we keep on going and compare a maggot to a small bacteria that live off it, then the maggot is relatively more complex than the bacteria, and we can keep going so far down, finally reaching the paradox concerning the difference of what it means for a body to take on a set of relations as their behaviour as opposed to a set of relations taking on the structure of a body? This is really the contradiction at the basis of geometry because in this science a set of relations form bodies and bodies take on a set of relations between each other, the same kinda relations that form their bodies. For example, Euler triangle, triangles within triangle
Euler line is a line determined from any triangle that is not equilateral. It is a central line of the triangle, and it passes through several important points determined from the triangle. Any of these lines passing through a triangle invariably forms more triangles. The same relations that any triangle has with any other triangle forms the body for a triangle. It is these motions that have a specific identity say a line, a point, a triangle, these basic forms of determinations are what any being is a product of and partakes in. The problem is that when we investigate them in purely abstract forms like we do in geometry, they loose the character they take on, and the nature of events that these characters subsume, such as a pig enjoying the gluttony of waste while
man finds that relation between a being and an object disgusting. And just like the identity of linearity takes on the identity of a line, this is instantaneous, unused food manifest as waste, the body is instant with the identity.
A fly does not have concept of space and planets, which does not mean that things do not exist because you do not see them, but that the fly is in a different reality, for it the space we perceive is a parallel reality. And we use the term “parallel” quite literally to mean compact within the same vicinity but each view not intercepting.
The reason for one difficulty in understanding how an object takes on a relation, or that an object is itself a relation, is because we try to limit the object to being a single relation, or a set of finite relations, like how can a fish be the motion of a curve, it cannot because it exhibits curves in its body but it is not just that motion. This is why the term relation is used to define a motion and is differentiated from it because it assumes assumes that a motion involves qualities other than the substance it assumes. The understanding is somewhat narrow minded because it noticed that objects are presented as single things, it assumes that they are made of up single things, which is true in that everything must have an identity but that identity does not mean everything is the same, even though a set of relations appear to be the same in a perceived object, and therefore has a common identity.
If we take any complex multivariable thing like a fish, we see that it is an identity of infinite of relations being determined in congruency to each other, the fish is curved like a wave in the ocean and therefore abstract the motion of curvature, it swallows which involves the motion of downwards, and downwards involve gravity, gravity involves weight, weight requires mass, and mass has density, density requires there to be hardness, hardness then involves a set of basic determine like atoms having the smallest distance between each other, which also presupposes softness, atoms having further distance from each other, and softness involves texture involves degrees like colour and colour involves a certain kind of relation between the atoms like atoms moving fast relative to each other is the structure of fire, so that when one atom moves fastest away from the other, it goes furthest away and ends up finding an atom nearest, since when it goes furthest away from one it just simply in a vacuum comes as fastest closes to it, which then goes furthest away from that and this discloses a compact metabolic system of deconstructing closely knit atoms forming , and this changes into different colours, we see that fire has blue, red, green etc, This entire complex system of relations is captured by a single object, and their congruency is that an observer formulated them in a specific manner and presented them to another observer who presented themselves into a different set of relations of these determinations.
When we say that the fish is not just a curve that is obviously right because it is not just it’s bent spine or curved tail because the tail and the spine are also hard, but they hard in a specific protein like gained from the environment and that makes the bone white. A living thing is a set of relations having their own determination but being done and having their result for some other determination having its own determination, a fish is a relation of swallowing, swimming, all these involve contractions, and muscles involve fibres and so on. The material structures of a thing of so many different determinations having their own distinct identity layered on top of each other to form a lively aesthetical creation. The image of gears represents this complexity of variabilities.
The popular imagery of gears working together each gear moving the other, represents this multi complex variability system.
Everything doing their own thing together, forms one of each thing
Nature in this way is like a computer but it is rather reversed because a computer is based on nature. Eventually the development of quantum computers will be able generate a slab of nature, but not as to create a nature but produce an experience so identical with a natural one the individual will have learned from it as having gone through a real one.
The only way theoretically that spacetime can be made into a particular object with finite duration is if the positive and the negative of the same substance is split and maintained so. This is already a natural phenomenon with the blackhole. The problem is that when you produce a blackhole the contradiction between being and nothing is literal, that if from being you transition into nothing, you become nothing. Or at least this is what is supposed? Logically if something enters into nothing that still becomes something, in this case everything. The problem with everything is that how can you distinguish each from everything all at once? Wormhole is not a feature of the universe it is the universe.
This hypothetical illustration demonstrates this.
(Wormhole centre of universe)
If there is a way where it is possible to enter a blackhole and maintain a state of consciousness of everything. Then perhaps one can choose the location to arrive to faster. But the only way to do this is to actually be everything. The notion of wormhole should not be understood as the changing of spacetime region for faster travel, but rather the change in the dimension of consciousness that allows a conception of the universe where it is possible to be a particular location. Wormhole can never be made only conceived.
The wormhole is an infinite point that enters finitely into itself. A singularity is not only at the beginning but also at the end, the mediation are the finite points of the infinite because the infinite only can frame itself as a finite point. A line is the extension of a point, and a circle is the connection of that extension with itself.
Wormholes in space are not a hollow place in a solid surface but rather the wormhole appears as spherical hole. The worm hole appears as a hollow sphere where the diameter and the circumference are the same.
Our common perception of the black hole is from the inside out, because we are in a relative place in the universe perceiving an infinite singularity, which is just the space beyond everything else, this is why black hole appears to be distortion or warps of spacetime, light, because they are dead ends, end points, nothing behind but potential. However the way potential appears is not as empty space ready to be filled but rather as the form of everything that already is. Theoretically perceiving the black hole from the outside in, it would appear as a wormhole, a sphere of the whole world- the world as an idea. Conceiving the world from the point of view of nothing, it appears as everything.
A spherical hole is geometrically an object that contains itself the void of object. This means that in the object there is the absence of itself, and in this abyss there are finite points leading to an infinite singularity which is just what contains the object in the first place.
(Add to holographic universe how
Just the word itself “event horizon” has an ontological meaning, i.e., you see an event from the horizon. In outer space you do not see objects, but rather observe more fundamentally the event which a set of possible objects resides in or are disclosed within. The reason for this is because objects in space are only attainable over long distances of space, and therefore take a long periods of time to come into “close” contact with. When the object is in close contact with the observer, we can say they are within the same period of time, this means that the actions of both concur during the same observable duration, .e.g., such that if I throw the ball that I’m holding, it simultaneously gets propelled out into a certain distance. When two objects are at a different periods of time, their cause and effect actions do not concur, e.g., the effect of one thing can happen entirely at a different time than the cause of it at a different time. Over long distances in space, the development of a rational being like a human being for instance may perhaps be at at some point in development, say 1984, while in another completely remote planet on another galaxy, only the very beginning germs of life are starting, while on some other planet some advanced alien race may be operating. These instances are obviously hypothetical but they are logical because time is itself the gradients of these varying degrees of potential, and in the concept of a potential, you cannot have one potential without the other, I.e., cannot have the primal without the advanced, just like you cannot have up without down.
We see a black hole as an event horizon encapsulating infinite dense darkness because this is the conception from the point of view of the knowable universe, being, looking into the infinite potential of nothing. From this perspective light appears to be enfolded around darkness. Whereas a wormhole would be looking from the point of view from nothing into the known universe, from infinity looking into the finite. A black hole would be the empty circle with white centre the circumference being the universe and the diameter being the size singularity. Whereas the wormhole, the diameter the content of the circle is the universe and the circumference is the singularity the nothing, potential. (Explain this better with better image the wormhole image should not show a circumference.
Reason operates in this way.
Observe is the act of Consciousness which functions as impartial experience of thought. The observer is the combination of determinations that register themselves. Consciousness is infinite in the sense that it is the ability to make thoughts into objects without being limited by the production but is determined further by it.
It can make 10 actions and remain its ability to make 20 more. Each of its action takes on form and becomes a finite object. This becomes distinguished from the conception which is finite and constitutes the standard for its activities, it is checkpoint that every other action culminates onto. Here you have reason and its object.
We often think that form is the exterior, shape of the object. The truth of the matter is that the form is the very content. What we think of an object is simply the conception.
The object being the circumference of the consciousness in the sense that reason is its substance as its form, while reason being the internal remains indifferent as its potential capacity to become an other. The reason is however the circumference when it is equally the reality of the object, that anything beyond reason is just a rational principle of itself, whereas the object is its centre because it is the action of reason cemented as an object constituting the standard, a checkpoint in its activity. Objects are the minute representations of its ideal self.
The solution is biological. The mind is a womb, void, the black hole where being becomes and non-being is, what makes thought material, the action is thought reaction is matter as the same determination. Pierces law of mind operates on the notion that the mind, the idea in its very self communicative nature materializes in the very proclamation of its logical principle. The observer is the synthesis of the logic which is the conclusion, the contradiction being itself the resolution is but the conflict of the inverse.
(Find where you talk about death and being born, and virus) how things relate qualitatively is based on their function and not size r location in the world. Size location etc. Are contingent on quality. The wormhole is brain holding the idea. Birth is the idea coming out of the womb only to come back to itself to see what it has missed in the predicate notion of itself.
Consciousness is what maintains itself. The observer determines to be the object or the activity. And when your the object your the activity and when your the activity your the object. The point and the other point on the end of the line connect back to itself only based on the resolution, but the resolution is just the very contradiction that there are opposed points, the opposition itself not being the excluding of one another but rather a critique of each in the dialogue of the communication of the very logical structure of thought that maintains the physical reality of the idea.
Gravity is ego, energy is the intent, gravity maintains the intent of the activity. The internal is the relation of taking turns in the mediation between the object and process.
The universe is connected in very strange ways that does not conform to our ordinary understanding of how quantity is connected. In quantitive connections things follow each other positionally, that the connection between two given entities are their position in relation to each other. A qualitative connection has nothing to do with the position of the principle but is rather dependent on the integral function it possess. The qualitative connection is based on the function that supplements or logically follows something else, which means that any two points in the universe can be connected on a quantum level based on their quality not merely quantity. It is true that quality cannot be without quantity however that is not to say that one is determined in relation to the other in one way. It is not true to say that quantity is first than quality, because there is a universe where quality is what determines the quantity, and in the late case the way it manifest in time is the generation of things
The blackhole model is the form of consciousness itself even at the particular level. When an observer looks at the immediate object,
(Add crystals- prisms)
The pure conception of consciousness takes the form of a particle moving through a wave. In the idea of a wormhole, the basic understanding is illustrated as if an observer is moving down a rabbit hole, going down a hole.
This illustration is incomplete because it assumes an absolute distinction between where the conception originates, as the first perspective of the observer looking down the rabbit hole, and where it ends, the deep abyss of the hole it is going towards. In this perspective the black hole is made distinct from the conception falling into it and therefore appears as if it is the element of its uncertainty. However so far as the black is the object of destination for the conception, it is at the same time identical with it. We therefore see the more accurate illustration where the hole in the wormhole is no longer an object of uncertainty but the form disclosing set of possibilities.
What is still missing in the illustration of the wormhole is to explain how one of those potentialities disclosed by it is an actual reality in transitional change?
Wormhole is to condense two points into the same space
Across all science fiction explanations a wormhole is associated with the activity of time travel. The idiom of time travel is a mythology relating to a real and genuine intuition about time. If we throw see the negative presupposition of time travel as the suspension of time to acquire a definite place, Time travel elucidates the intuition of a time change endured by an observer as a result of moving space. In a wormholes space is bent to reduce the distance and therefore the time taken to arrive. Space itself is moved. In locomotion this is common that an object occupying space moves through space. But the difficulty arises when the
The observer, or the conception is the form whereby space is determined as occupying a reality into a different possibility. For example perception determines space. From a first eye point of view a car moving in a definite direction appears to move slower because there is more control
A car appears to move slower from a first eye point of view as opposed from a third person point of view. From a third person point of view appears to pass at an instance or at faster instances as the control over the direction of it