The Structure of Space
10th June 2015
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
The Structure of Space.
"You can't fit a square peg into a round hole".
Although this example statement is not a good analogy as an example of the what I am about to explain because I see inconsistent paradoxes within it, it will suffice because you can basically understand the principles I am trying to make.
[The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
In this example, if the structure of Space is round, i.e. The shape of the hole is round, then a square peg will not fit into it. Space itself by itself is totally abstract, and it can only be defined as a 'Real' space by the 'box' that defines it (another Tea Break Book). The shape of the space is defined in this case by an actual structure.
Now if the object (the peg equivalent) was an actual flat square object (like a puzzle) then you could fit it into a space with a flat grid like structure with the grid the same size as the squares. By putting lots of squares in this grid you could create a larger square with no spaces left over.
Now if the objects were round structures (discs) then it would be more appropriate to stack these round structures one on top of each other to form a tube, again no spaces left over.
You could not place them into a grid like structure of squares [the principle that it is the wrong space structure].
If we look at the grid structure, you will notice we can chop the square into smaller squares and the structure is the same, it is just smaller squares, just a smaller scale.
Abstractly the example above is a 2 dimensional space, although I used flat 3 dimensional (puzzle) pieces.
The full 3 dimensional space example should be cubes like a block puzzle. These blocks can be broken down into smaller cubes and the structure is the same, it is just smaller cubes, just a smaller scale.
The purpose of all the examples above was to highlight the structure of space that (normal) physics uses, which is cubic in structure.
If this was the 'Real' structure of space, then any object could be reduced to any number of the smallest cubes of Matter or Energy.
The problem is that Matter and Energy do not consist of any small cubes [The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
Physics reduces Matter and Energy as points in this 3 dimensional grid (cube) structure, because these points are abstract, physics has then to add additional abstract qualities to these points to explain 'Reality'.
The abstract 3 dimensional space and the blocks (cubes) are considered uniform with no holes in them.
In 'Reality' all structures have holes in them I.e. other spaces (that are not cubes), therefore the structure of Space should also have this quality built into it [The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
My model of 'APE's has this built in structure with holes already built into the space, so you can build the Universe from the bottom up, from the smallest scale (the quantum scale) which is grainy [or digital]. Then as you increase the scales you can simplify this graininess and smooth it out to obtain the classical analogue scale e.g. SpaceTime curvature.
19th December 2017
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
To clarify SpaceTime curvature only emerges from the grainy sub space (made of 'APE's, dynamic quanta of 'Real' space) and is just this graininess smoothed out.
4th November 2018
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
Or put another way Einstein's General Relativity that considers space as continuous, can only be considered continuous at large scales when you simplify and ignore this graininess.
Morph your mind with Morphological at
apepes.com
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
The Structure of Space.
"You can't fit a square peg into a round hole".
Although this example statement is not a good analogy as an example of the what I am about to explain because I see inconsistent paradoxes within it, it will suffice because you can basically understand the principles I am trying to make.
[The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
In this example, if the structure of Space is round, i.e. The shape of the hole is round, then a square peg will not fit into it. Space itself by itself is totally abstract, and it can only be defined as a 'Real' space by the 'box' that defines it (another Tea Break Book). The shape of the space is defined in this case by an actual structure.
Now if the object (the peg equivalent) was an actual flat square object (like a puzzle) then you could fit it into a space with a flat grid like structure with the grid the same size as the squares. By putting lots of squares in this grid you could create a larger square with no spaces left over.
Now if the objects were round structures (discs) then it would be more appropriate to stack these round structures one on top of each other to form a tube, again no spaces left over.
You could not place them into a grid like structure of squares [the principle that it is the wrong space structure].
If we look at the grid structure, you will notice we can chop the square into smaller squares and the structure is the same, it is just smaller squares, just a smaller scale.
Abstractly the example above is a 2 dimensional space, although I used flat 3 dimensional (puzzle) pieces.
The full 3 dimensional space example should be cubes like a block puzzle. These blocks can be broken down into smaller cubes and the structure is the same, it is just smaller cubes, just a smaller scale.
The purpose of all the examples above was to highlight the structure of space that (normal) physics uses, which is cubic in structure.
If this was the 'Real' structure of space, then any object could be reduced to any number of the smallest cubes of Matter or Energy.
The problem is that Matter and Energy do not consist of any small cubes [The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
Physics reduces Matter and Energy as points in this 3 dimensional grid (cube) structure, because these points are abstract, physics has then to add additional abstract qualities to these points to explain 'Reality'.
The abstract 3 dimensional space and the blocks (cubes) are considered uniform with no holes in them.
In 'Reality' all structures have holes in them I.e. other spaces (that are not cubes), therefore the structure of Space should also have this quality built into it [The principle that it is the wrong space structure].
My model of 'APE's has this built in structure with holes already built into the space, so you can build the Universe from the bottom up, from the smallest scale (the quantum scale) which is grainy [or digital]. Then as you increase the scales you can simplify this graininess and smooth it out to obtain the classical analogue scale e.g. SpaceTime curvature.
19th December 2017
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
To clarify SpaceTime curvature only emerges from the grainy sub space (made of 'APE's, dynamic quanta of 'Real' space) and is just this graininess smoothed out.
4th November 2018
Private & Confidential Copyright © Mr A Pépés
Or put another way Einstein's General Relativity that considers space as continuous, can only be considered continuous at large scales when you simplify and ignore this graininess.
Morph your mind with Morphological at
apepes.com
