---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote :
As I understand it, Planck is the guy that proposed it is impossible to measure anything smaller than 10 to the power of -23 centimeters. As such, that is effectively the juncture between the relative and the absolute. John Hagelin proposed that is where the quantum foam rises from the unified field. IMO, the proposal is logical and is the likely explanation for the Big Ban. However, physicists like Stephen Hawking do not believe in this theory since they believe in the material world paradigm. Therefore, they believe that the quantum is the smallest matter in the universe--meaning that they have to conclude that the universe created itself. IMO, this conclusion is illogical and foolish, notwithstanding their education and research in physics. Hawking does believe in this theory because it's the same thing. He would just dispute that it has anything to do with consciousness. As far as the universe goes it would have to have arisen somehow from the Planck scale because everything does. It's just a convenient unit to describe everything else, smaller than that and the maths become meaningless, like the statement that the "quantum foam" is conscious, what does it mean? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <s3raphita@...> wrote : Re "If it's small you want": Well the Planck length is tiny - TO US! Let's not be chauvinist in our judgements. It's never been clear to me whether the Planck length is the smallest size any-thing can possibly be, or if it is "just" an impassable barrier for us with our human limitations. Are there - at least as a possibility - infinite worlds smaller still that we shall never be able to access? I've also come across the idea that men and women are size-wise (six feet tall) approximately in the middle between the Planck length on the one hand and the supposed size of the Universe on the other. Is that significant? Perhaps in one sense we really are the centre of the Universe ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : If it's small you want, check out the total perspective vortex: The Scale of the Universe 2 http://htwins.net/scale2/ The Scale of the Universe 2 http://htwins.net/scale2/ Zoom from the edge of the universe to the quantum foam of spacetime and learn about everything in between. View on htwins.net http://htwins.net/scale2/ Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : My guess is that they'll find exotic particles that are smaller than the previous one. But how far can the LHC go? In the meantime, the leading physicists will have a field day in making speculations about what happened at the moment of the Big Bang or even before the Big Bang. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : The investment in the LHC is paying off. There may be other discoveries that will pave new developments in physics. But will it lead to the Unified Field? Perhaps it already has? Insight into the 'energy of the vacuum' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy More speculatively, the Higgs field has also been proposed as the energy of the vacuum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy, which at the extreme energies of the first moments of the Big Bang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang caused the universe to be a kind of featureless symmetry of undifferentiated extremely high energy. In this kind of speculation, the single unified field of a Grand Unified Theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory is identified as (or modeled upon) the Higgs field, and it is through successive symmetry breakings of the Higgs field or some similar field at phase transitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_transition that the present universe's known forces and fields arise From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
