Combination of three theoretical constructs to identify ... · 1 Combination of three theoretical...

1

Combination of three theoretical constructs to identify the “Ultimate Theory”

Turin, March 24, 2001 Piero Benazzo

Truth spirit, enlighten and guide our research

O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us that call upon you

I INFINITE UNIVERSES IN A SINGLE COSMOS..........................................4

Is space finite? .........................................................................................................4

Each cosmos observer observes his/her universe...........................................4

Wholeness of the cosmos.....................................................................................5

Difference between cosmos and universe .........................................................5

Beyond the universe infinity and beyond the cosmos wholeness.................7

The null.....................................................................................................................8

Riemann’s solution ................................................................................................8

Friedmann’s solution .............................................................................................9

Compatibility between Friedmann’s and Riemann’s solutions ......................9

Riemann’s hypersphere in terms of wholeness and nullity .........................10

The null arises as both external and internal to the whole ...........................10

The whole and the null are both mutually opposite and mutually absent ..10

The whole is the null and vice versa .................................................................11

Examples of the sameness of the whole and the null ....................................12

The whole-null paradox .......................................................................................12

Timeless cosmos and a theory to describe it ..................................................13

Phylosophy of “finite” and “infinite”, and “wholeness of the cosmos” .....13

2

Infinite universes in a single cosmos: cosmological democracy ................14

Empirical cosmological theories and theoretical cosmological theories...15

II COSMOS CURVATURE MEASUREMENT ................................................15

General Relativity and light cones .......................................................................15

General Relativity requires local time incurvature .........................................18

“Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness” ..............19

Exercises with light cones on the universe horizon.......................................22

Flat universes in a curved cosmos....................................................................23

Optical effects of the cosmos curvature ..........................................................25

Cosmos curvature in time...................................................................................25

Time-retreat within the cosmos .........................................................................28

Cosmos curvature diagram.................................................................................29

Time relativity of events and simultaneous time for events .........................31

Cosmos space-time circumference...................................................................32

III ACTION OF THE FORCE OF ABSENCE OF THE ELSEWHERE..........33

The cosmos as whole-null paradox and the two basic “meta-dimensions” ...33

Six light directrixes and six time directrixes, totaling twelve dimensions .34

Superstring Theory and Whole-Null model......................................................36

The four-dimensional hypersphere unveils a twelve-dimensional cosmos37

Twelve dimension theory as parameter of reference .....................................37

Cosmos light-time circumference......................................................................38

Fantasizing on inter-galactic journeys via time-light: Star Trek...................39

Black holes, string theory and inter-galactic corridors .................................39

Hidden dimensions in terms of action of the absence of the elsewhere ....40

Matter-energy in terms of time-light in a string theory ..................................41

Heisenberg’s Indetermination Principle and the force of absence ..............41

3

The force of absence is Cosmic Spirit ..............................................................42

The observer’s force in the cosmos..................................................................42

Limitations to the observer’s cosmic power: universes intersections .......43

Fantasizing on matter, energy and dark forces: Star Wars...........................44

Dark matter according to the Standard Model.................................................45

Dark energy and quintessence according to the Standard Model ...............45

The force of absence of the elsewhere in the Whole-Null Cosmos model .46

Localization of the force of absence of the elsewhere...................................48

IV COSMOS CONFORMATION ....................................................................49

Incurvature in the null..........................................................................................49

Null incurvature - congruence with observations...........................................51

Incurvature in space-time and cosmos incurvature .......................................55

Absence of a matter-energy center in space-time ..........................................55

The center of the cosmos....................................................................................59

Infinite past from beyond the horizon and infinite future beyond the horizon ...................................................................................................................60

Three types of cosmic spirit; one is force of dark matter and energy ........61

An assessment of the amount of dark matter..................................................62

The cosmos is contained in itself like Chinese boxes ...................................63

How the infinite universes beyond the horizon act in our own universe....64

Eleven-dimensions theory as a description of the observed universe .......64

Big Bang Theory as a description of the observer .........................................65

Mutual necessity of the three theories .............................................................66

Virtual mirage of initial explosion: virtuality of Big Bang..............................66

Age of the observed universe and age of the cosmos...................................67

BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................68

EXAMPLES AND NOTES......................................................................................73

4

Hypothesis of virtuality mirage of cosmic bodies spatial retreat.................73

The democracy of General Relativity ................................................................76

Relativity of time...................................................................................................77

Inverting the point of observation........................................................................78

The cosmos relativity angle: 60 degrees on the horizon ...............................79

Example: conversation between Mickey and Minnie......................................80

Simultaneous pasts of the events on the cosmological horizon .................81

Inconsistencies in calculating the age of the universe..................................82

I INFINITE UNIVERSES IN A SINGLE COSMOS

Is space finite? (go to Table of Contents)

In the April 99 issue of “Scientific American1” magazine, three researchers, Jean-Pierre

Luminet, Glenn D. Starkman and Jeffrey R. Weeks theorize a finite rather than an infinite

space. The question of whether cosmos space is finite or infinite is an age-long debate, which

is yet to be solved conclusively, by philosophy as well as physics. A solution is proposed in

the paragraphs below.

Möbius band II; Escher, Maurits Cornelis (1898-1972)

Each cosmos observer observes his/her universe

(go to Table of Contents)

1 Luminet, Jean Pierre; Starkman, Glenn D.; Weeks, Jeffrey R.; Is Space Finite?; in “Scientific American”; April 1999

5

The wholeness of the cosmos whole is made up of the observer plus the remaining of the

cosmos. We may ask, then, whether the scientist can empirically observe the wholeness of

the cosmos whole. The scientist is a part of the cosmos; whether a small or a large part is

irrelevant to the reasoning set forth below. The scientist observes the cosmos, minus himself

and minus the instruments he is using to observe it. He is therefore unable to perform

experiments on the wholeness of the Cosmos. The observed part of the Cosmos is infinite in

that it is incomplete of the infinitesimal observer to complete itself, to become a finite whole, in

the wholeness of the whole. The infinitesimal observer observes the infinity made up of the

cosmos minus himself. This infinity is consistent with the characteristics of universe infinity as

described by physicists in accordance with cosmological observations. This observed

universe, however, is different from the finite wholeness of the cosmos. The laws

experimented by astrophysicists are derived from physics experiments conducted on the

infinite universe observed. Transposing these laws to the finite wholeness of the cosmos

whole (observer + observation instruments + observed universe), without adjusting them to

the different characteristics of the cosmos whole in relation to the observed universe may lead

to misleading results.

Wholeness of the cosmos


Experimental scientists are unable to perform direct empirical experiments on the cosmos

whole – this unfortunately has to be acknowledged. In order to observe the wholeness of the

cosmos a scientist should position himself outside it; but to do this he should subtract himself

from the cosmos whole. What would remain for him to observe is the observed universe; it is

impossible to position oneself outside the cosmos as an observer. This is the reason why only

theoretical physicists can conceive physical theories on the wholeness of the cosmos, and

these theories can never be directly verified through empirical experiments. Theories on the

wholeness of the cosmos can predict certain behaviors of the observed universe. When these

predictions are empirically verified on the observed universe, they indirectly confirm the

theories on the wholeness of the cosmos.

Difference between cosmos and universe


The logical-philosophical argument above implies a difference between the wholeness of the

cosmos and the infiniteness (infinity) of the observed universe. With respect to this, the

discussion now considers the definitions of the two terms given by philosophical dictionaries2.

On the one hand, “cosmos” comes from the Greek word kosmos, which means “the ordered

wholeness of all existing things ”. With Einstein’s general relativity, “things” have become

”events”, so that the definition can be edited to read “ the ordered wholeness of all existing

2 “Dizionario di Filosofia” – Abbagnano, Nicola – Utet-TEA – Torino, 1993 / “Enciclopedia Garzanti di Filosofia” – Garzanti Editore – 1993 – ISBN 88-11-50460-0

6

events”. Throughout history, philosophers addressed this definition in one direction or

another; the remarks made above, however, apply to all of these philosophical routes. On the

other hand, the term “universe” is used to indicate any wholeness, i.e. all the events having

one or more characteristics in common, rather than the complete wholeness of events. The

word Universe also has an original literal meaning of “towards one”. In this sense it was

applied to God, to affirm that every event tends towards God, or “ towards one”. In this

perspective the universe was seen as one. From these origins, the focus now moves on to the

considerations contained in this paper. In light of modern developments in philosophy and

cosmological physics, the “cosmos” as “ordered wholeness of existing events” can be viewed

as an absolute concept insofar as it comprises wholeness – and God, by definition according

to believers, governs wholeness. As to “universe”, the concept can noticeably be applied to

any restricted set of events (objects) and is meant as a complete set of all the events having

one characteristic in common. In this meaning, “universe” lacks the idea of absoluteness

inherent in the concept of “cosmos”. Logically, the wholeness of ordered events of the cosmos

can be divided into the observer on the one side and the remaining, the wholeness of cosmos

events minus the observer, on the other. This other part is composed of all the events which

share the common characteristic of conditioning, whether directly or indirectly, overtly and

covertly, that observer’s daily experience, and as such constitute the observer’s universe.

This universe is “towards one” in that each observer is a one. There are, however, an infinite

number of observers, and therefore an infinite number of universes. This relativistic concept of

universe is consistent with its original definition: “any wholeness” of “members of a

homogeneous set”. Conventionally, from now on cosmos will mean the wholeness of the

whole, and universe will mean that part of the cosmic wholeness which is observed by an

observer.

7

Hand holding a reflecting sphere (self-portrait); Escher, Maurits Cornelis (1898-1972)

Contrary to what Escher’s image might suggest, an observer is unable to see the cosmos

from the outside, as the cosmos would be itself minus the observer, and therefore would be

different from the wholeness of events existing in the cosmos itself. Due to this

transcendentality, no graphic representation of the cosmos is possible. On the other hand,

graphic images of the universe reach our own eyes in our everyday experience, also enlarged

in many cosmology articles.

Beyond the universe infinity and beyond the cosmos wholeness


Theological discussions about the great beyond are here disregarded. The “beyond” referred

to indicates everything which is positioned “beyond” these aggregates. Some believe that

beyond the infinity (infiniteness) of the universe there is the null. However, in light of the

linguistic clarifications provided above, some otherness remains beyond the infinity

(infiniteness) of the observed universe: namely, the observer and his observation instrument.

Conversely, the cosmos aggregates in itself the totality of partialities, of every event

anywhere, whether in the past, the present or the future. Nothing can be added to the

wholeness of the cosmos whole, because the whole already contains every event. The whole

is finite. Beyond the wholeness of the cosmos whole there is nothing more than the nullity of

the null. To conceive of vacuum is straight forward, differently for the null. Cosmologists are

certainly interested in philosophical debates about the null, which is what will be discussed in

the paragraphs below.

8

The null


To conceive rationally of the null is even harder than to conceive rationally of vacuum.

Vacuum can be represented in the mind: it is found inside a bulb, between the Earth and the

Moon, around a space probe, or an astronaut outside the spaceship, or a cake packaged in

vacuum. The null is beyond vacuum, it is absence of vacuum inside the bulb and absence of

the bulb, absence of vacuum around the space probe, absence of the astronaut and the

vacuum surrounding him, absence of the vacuum packaging and of the packaged cake,

absence of vacuum around the Earth, and absence of the Earth and the stars, absence of

events and absence of dreams. Beyond this rational representation it is difficult to proceed.

The null is unobservable, no empirical experiment can be performed on it. Therefore, any

observer wishing to consider the null can but assume its characteristics, without being able to

verify them through empirical scientific observations. The unprovableness of hypotheses

about the null can be overcome by considering the whole which is opposed to the null. In fact,

the null is defined as the opposite of the whole.

The way to test and validate hypotheses regarding the null, then, is to consider such

hypotheses as fundamental axioms in a theoretical model of the null and wholeness, and then

test the theoretical model by applying it to various aspects of our daily life as observers. This

method may lead to a theoretical model which is acceptable and proven by functionality,

rather than by empirical demonstration in the scientific domain, or deductive inferential in the

philosophical domain. If the model functions, then it validates the unprovable axioms it is

based on. A parallel between the null and vacuum highlights their differences. Vacuum is the

absence of some component: even when vacuum is mentioned without specifying further, the

meaning is the absence of air and other substances. The null, on the other hand, is a word

which is properly used by itself, rather than in combination with others defining its scope.

Therefore, if the null can be mentioned by itself, this means that the null implies the absence

of any component, of all components, the absence of this definition, of the “imply” component,

of the “any” component, of the “component” component, even of the “absence” component. All

the infinite absences of components can be simply grouped in a single absense, the absence

of absence. The null lacks any component, including the “lack” component.

Riemann’s solution


Current theoretical interpretations of cosmological observations prompt our minds to represent

the beyond in the form of cosmic vacuum. The concept of null suggests itself to many. Which

mathematical model of cosmos curvature can describe this situation? The cosmos is the

wholeness beyond which there is the null: nothing more than the null, in fact, is beyond the

whole. The German mathematician Georg F. B. Riemann solved this dilemma around the mid-

19th century. The model of the cosmos he proposed was the hypersphere, a three-dimensional

9

surface of a four-dimensional cosmos, similarly to the way in which the surface of an ordinary

sphere is a two-dimentional surface of a three-dimensional ball. This space is finite, but

returns onto itself and therefore presents no border extremity problems, thus solving the

dilemma of the alternative between finite space and infinite space. On the one hand, the

finiteness of cosmos space is consistent with the finiteness of the wholeness, solving the

dilemma of an infinite space incompatible with the finiteness of the whole. On the other hand,

the possibility to travel endlessly in a finite space that returns onto itself, just like it is possible

to circumnavigate the finite surface of the Earth always in the same direction endlessly, is

consistent with the infiniteness of cosmos events. Albert Einstein chose Riemann’s

hypersphere as an overall form when he published his first model of relativity, or Restricted

Relativity, in 1917.

Friedmann’s solution


Einstein realized that general relativity implied a universe in which gravity caused matter-energy in

space-time to collapse into itself, under its own weight. He corrected this by introducing the

cosmological constant in his equations. This term implies a static universe. An easy mental

experiment to visualize this constant consists in taking a cubic meter of space and removing all the

matter and radiation it contains. The cosmological constant describes how some forces are still

present in that cubic meter. This “accounting” solution was challenged in 1922 by the Russian

mathematician Aleksander Friedmann who produced cosmological models based on Einstein’s

equations without using the cosmological constant. This proved the model to be unstable, like a

pen poised on its center of gravity, on the one side tending towards collapse, on the other towards

expansion. Later in the same decade, the astronomer Edwin P. Hubble collected cosmological

observations of an expanding universe. Riemann’s hypersphere proved to be incompatible with

empirical observations, and the model proposed by the Russian mathematician Aleksander

Friedmann became established. Friedmann generalized Einstein’s model to allow for an

expanding universe. This solution implies a hyperbolic as opposed to hyperspheric space. At

the time of writing these pages, Friedmann’s equations are still being commonly used by

cosmologists.

Compatibility between Friedmann’s and Riemann’s solutions


Let us now consider the characteristics of Einstein’s Relativity and scientific observations. We

may view the former as a theory elaborated by a theoretical scientist. As such, relativity can

consider the wholeness of the cosmos whole as static, consistently with its finiteness. On the

other hand, empirical observations of the universe, unable to see the whole, have required

other geometries. These geometries concern the universe observed in the form of cosmos

minus the observing scientist and minus the observation instrument. In other words,

Riemann’s solution adopted by Einstein can be used for the wholeness of the cosmos whole,

10

but is inappropriate for the observed universe. Friedmann’s solution can be used to describe

the observed universe, but is inadequate for the wholeness of the cosmos.

Riemann’s hypersphere in terms of wholeness and nullity


Riemann’s hypersphere consists of a four-dimensional form in which one can travel endlessly

in a finite space and return to oneself an infinite number of times. If this hypershere is applied

to the wholeness of the cosmos whole, then the whole is comprised in it, with its every-where

and every-when. Nothing more than the null is beyond the hypersphere and it is inappropriate

to imagine what might be beyond it (the corresponding graphics are developed in the last

paragraphs). We can now detail the impossibility to think of the beyond, in relation to the

wholeness of the whole, to the hypersphere. In this perspective, the following question might

trigger some interesting argumentations: Is the null a component of the whole?

The null arises as both external and internal to the whole


“The whole” has a different meaning from “everything”. “Every event is corruptible” translates

into “everything is corruptible”. “The wholeness of the aggregate of all events is absolute”

translates into “the whole is absolute”. In the next pages we will use “the whole”, rather than

“everything” to indicate the aggregate. The wholeness of the whole contains all its

components. Nothing more than the null is excluded from the whole, i.e. no component is

excluded from the whole. Hence, the aggregate composition of no component is excluded

from the whole, which is to say that the null is excluded from the whole. The null, therefore, is

outside the whole - outside the wholeness of the whole. Now, to think of a concept means to

think of a component of the whole. If this component were external to the wholeness of the

whole, then the whole would be different, other than the whole. If the null can be talked about,

then it is a component of the wholeness of the whole. If it is a component, then it is inside the

whole. Therefore “the null is inside the whole”. “No component” is a concept and therefore is

inside the whole. The aggregate composition of no component is also inside the whole. This

aggregate composition is the null. The null is inside the whole. We have just said that the null

is outside the whole, and immediately afterwards we are forced to state that the null is inside

the whole. This argumentation leads to the paradox that the null is simultaneously inside and

outside the whole.

The whole and the null are both mutually opposite and mutually absent


The attention may now focus on light. The opposite of light is darkness. The absence of light

is darkness. The sameness of a component’s opposite and that component’s absence allows

to invert the terms of the problems, and the words. The discussion focuses then on darkness.

The opposite of darkness is light. The absence of darkness is the presence of the opposite of

11

darkness, i.e. the presence of light. The absence of darkness is light. Light and darkness are

both the opposite and the absence of each other. The discussion now goes back to the null

and the whole. The null is the opposite of the whole. The null is also the absence of every

event of the whole; it is the absence of the whole. On the other hand, the whole is the

opposite of the null. The whole is also the presence of every event. The presence of every

event is the absence of no event more than the null; it is the absence of the null. The whole

and the null are both the opposite and the absence of each other.

The whole is the null and vice versa


1) The whole contains every event, it contains every component. It also contains the

“absence of the null” component. On the other hand, in the paragraph above “the whole”

was defined as “absence of the null”. This leads to the conclusion that the whole is the

absence of the null and one of its components is the absence of the null, i.e. the whole

itself. One of the components of the whole is the whole itself (enigmatic).

2) Let us now take the null. The null is the aggregate composition of all the absences of

components, including the absence of the “absence” component. It also includes the

absence of the “wholeness of the whole” component. Therefore the null is the absence of

everything, of every event, and contains the “absence of every event other than the null”

component. But the “absence of every event other than the null” is the null. The null

therefore contains itself as a component.

3) The whole contains any component, including the null, as the null can be conceived of and

expressed. The null therefore is a component of the whole.

4) The null contains absences. It also contains the absence of the null. The absence of the

null is the whole. The null contains the whole (enigmatic).

Hence, the whole contains the null (3) and the whole (1) (enigmatic). The null contains the null

(2) and the whole (4) (enigmatic).

If the dialogue says that “this drinking vessel includes this glass” , and conversely that “this

glass includes this same drinking vessel”, then the inferred argument states that “the glass is

the drinking vessel”, or that the “drinking vessel is the glass”. Similarly, having argued that the

whole contains the null and the null contains the whole, then the null and the whole coincide.

The null and the whole are identical (enigmatic).

Thus the discussion highlights four simultaneous characteristics of the null, two of which are

tangible while the other two are enigmatic.

The two manifest ones are: The null is the opposite of the whole, and it is the absence of the

whole.

The two enigmatic ones are: The null is contained in the whole, and it is the whole.

Regarding the whole, four simultaneous characteristics arise, as follows:

Manifestly: The whole is the opposite of the null, and the absence of the null.

12

Enigmatically: The whole contains the null, and it is the null.

These characteristics combine incredibly. Incredible in the sense that they are beyond our

experiencing possibilities, in other words they are transcendent.

Drawing hands; Escher, Maurits Cornelis (1898-1972)

Examples of the sameness of the whole and the null


As an approximation, let us imagine opposing horizontally our two hands in a static position.

Two forces oppose each other, yet the hands are stationary: this is due to the fact that the two

forces mutually nullify each other. The resulting horizontal force is a null force. It is

conceivable that all the forces of the whole partially oppose each other, more and more

composedly as larger agglomerates of its components relate to each other, until they totally

nullify each other if considered all together (including the observer and the observation

instrument).

The whole-null paradox


The identity between the whole and the null is a paradox, and from here onwards it will be

referred to as concept of the whole-null paradox. Within the material presence of everyday

events it is impossible to operate two opposites simultaneously. It is impossible to assemble

an engine and disassemble it at the same time. It is impossible to go up a stair and at the

same time go down the same stair. This is why, to our thinking, the paradox is transcendent.

However, it should be noted that the transcendentality of the paradox is consistent with the

transcendentality of the wholeness of the whole and the nullity of the null. By definition, the

13

cosmos is the same as the wholeness of the whole. Consequently, the Cosmos is the same

as the Null-Whole Paradox, and Riemann’s hypersphere is an appropriate description of it.

Timeless cosmos and a theory to describe it


Since the null lacks all elements, even the “lack” element, the null also lacks the concept of

time. Because of the whole-null identity, the whole also lacks the concept of time. Time

extends within the wholeness of the cosmos, but for the wholeness of the whole time is

indifferent, it is absent. The cosmos is without duration, and it is finite in that nothing can be

further added (to the wholeness) or subtracted (from the null). In the classic philosophical and

physical conception of the birth of the universe, everything originated from the “explosion”

known as Big Bang, from which the present universe developed through the expansion of the

initial bang. In addition, the universe is seen as expanding towards a different conformation:

infinite expansion, or perfect balance between Big Bang expansive force and gravity

contractive force, or final Big Crunch and return to the situation that existed prior to the Big

Bang. This vision describes an evolutionary situation of the universe, in contrast to the static

wholeness-nullity of the cosmos whole. Note however that the Whole-Null model focuses on

the cosmos, while the Big Bang theory focuses on the universe observed by the observer. The

two models examine aggregates that are different from each other. The Big Bang evolutionary

picture separates the concept of time from all other physical phenomena, in order to observe

their evolution precisely “throughout time”. This is in contrast to the description of the whole

and the null discussed above. Therefore the Big Bang described by astrophysics is different

from the whole and the null. In view of the considerations expressed above, the Big Bang

model describes the way in which the observer sees the cosmos from its inside, being a

limited part of the same cosmos. The cosmos is paradoxical in that it is null and whole at the

same time. For the observer, the disaggregating of timeless null into a whole occurs at each

instant, i.e. outside time, and lasts for a period of time which is infinite for him/her. These

contrasting simultaneous situations therefore require aparadoxical cosmological configuration.

This would enableto describe cosmological observations through two concurrent models,

providing two simultaneous interpretations. These interpretations require a theoretical

construction suitable to examine the following basic characteristics:

1) On the one hand, description of the simultaneous nullity and wholeness of the cosmos;

2) On the other hand, reinterpretation of the Big Bang model as description of the

universe observed by the observer.

Phylosophy of “finite” and “infinite”, and “wholeness of the cosmos”


At this point the discourse can consider the logical-philosophical question of finiteness and

infiniteness. Regarding duration within the whole-null, the cosmos null is disaggregated into a

whole, made of infinite aggregated parts. Within it, events of finite duration succeed each

14

other for an infinite time. Time is infinite because of the succession of events experienced by

the observer, who is a part of the cosmos. The observer is an infinitesimal reflecting himself in

infiniteness. Man’s duration has a beginning and an end. The cosmos’ duration is

infinite/endless for man. However, duration is absent for the wholeness-nullity of the cosmos.

The cosmos is finite, without duration. A man considered as an event is infinite/endless, in

that it has still to “finish/end”: the possibilities in his future are still infinite/endless, even when

but a few seconds are left to his finite duration. The same applies to any event, a glass for

example. As long as its finite duration continues, it is infinite. Its shape is subject to infinite

scratching, chipping, wear and polish, until it breaks and loses the characteristics of a glass.

In summary:

Finiteness Infiniteness (infinity)

Cosmos Duration of the Cosmos (within it)

Duration of each event Each event

Duration of the human person’s life Each human person And how should the universe be categorized in this perspective? Infinite universes in a single cosmos: cosmological democracy


Modern philosophy has affirmed the validity of personal “truths”, without the imposition of a

uniquetruth. Democracies mostly respect each person’s subjective truths and concern

themselves with organizing the everyday application of each person’s vision of the world (and

of the universe) so that they may coexist peacefully. The whole-null is invariable and as such

it is the same for everyone. Such a concept may seem to bring us back to a dark past in which

some holders of a truth impose it on others by force of law or money or weapons. However,

we have examined the impossibility for anyone to experience rationally the wholeness-nullity

of the whole-null. This experience is only possible mystically, or through love for christians. It

is, however, a subjective experience, which is impossible to communicate in rational terms.

Since it is acknowledged that each one of us is an original subject, different from the others,

and since each one of us reflects himself in his own universe in a single total and invariable

whole-null, the consequence is a multiplicity of universes. Each observer has his universe in

the single wholeness-nullity cosmos. There is an infinite number of observers, and therefore

an infinite number of universes. We humans on the Earth are similar, and therefore the infinite

number of universes experienced by the infinite number of humans on the Earth (if their

progeny continues) are similar to each other.

Finiteness Infiniteness (infinity)

Duration of universe life Each universe

15

Cosmos Cosmos Duration (within it)

Duration of each event Each event

Duration of the human person’s life Each human person

Man is infinite, the universe is infinite, while the cosmos is finite both as null and as whole;

and without duration. The cosmos is finite, always already begun and always already ended.

Empirical cosmological theories and theoretical cosmological theories


Standard Cosmological Theory and Inflationary Cosmological Theory are two theories based

on empirical observations. Therefore they are inevitably unable to theorize on the wholeness

of the cosmos. They theorize on the observed universe. Conversely, the String Theory – p-

brane Theory – M-Teory is a trend in theoretical physics research. This trend might be well

suited to describe the wholeness of the cosmos whole. Given these premises, it must be

stressed that cosmologists’ empirical observations are indisputable. They can only be

interpreted in different perspectives from the usual ones.

In the next pages we will move from Einstein’s General Relativity based on Riemann’s

hypersphere, and empirical cosmological observations, and we will find a way to make them

compatible through the Cosmos Whole-Null Model. These results are compared with studies

related to M-theory (of strigs/branes).


II COSMOS CURVATURE MEASUREMENT

General Relativity and light cones (go to Table of Contents)

The famous equation E=mc2 and particle collision experiments conducted in research

laboratories indicate the impossibility to have a single particle travel at light speed in our

proximity. This would take infinite energy. For the sake of simplification, let us ignore this

limitation for the moment. As an example, let us consider Mickey Mouse now landed on

Quarkland, which is moving away from the Earth at the speed of light. On the Earth, Donald

Duck keeps his eye fixed on the telescope and observes Mickey on Quarkland as it zooms

away.

As relativity states, at this limit speed the clocks of Mickey’s fellow citizens appear to be still.

We would see Mickey suspended in midair while plunging from the rock of Catapulco into

Aladia Bay. Sooner or later Mickey should fall into the water; instead, we see him motionless

in the air, as if floating weightlessly. For us, his time has stopped.

1) arrow: space axis

2) circle: frame axis

3) diamond: time axis

16

This concept can be expressed through a diagram with light cones, where the marks on the

segments indicate different types of axes:

The diagram has three dimensions and intends to represent the events of a four-dimensional

universe structured as three space dimensions and one time dimension. To take into account

this discrepancy between graphic possibilities and actual events, one space dimension is

overlooked in the diagram, therefore rather than volumes we are discussing surfaces. There

are two space axes, horizontal in this diagram. The time axis is vertical. The frame axes follow

the motion of a single frame in space-time, to examine the position of that frame at any

specific point in space-time. In the paragraphs that follow we will discuss how to determine

the angle, i.e. the pace of motion, for frame axes. For this purpose we will review the extreme

case of a planet (which we will call Quarkland) moving away from the Earth at the speed of

light.

17

The speed of light is a given space traveled in a given time. In two-dimensional space, light

expands in concentric circles. Considering the vertical time dimension in this diagram, light is

represented by a cone. The lower cone with the summit upwards represents light coming from

the past, from other bodies than the one considered. The upper cone with the summit

downwards represents light issuing from the considered body towards the cosmic space, into

the future. Quarkland is traveling on the cone surface in that it travels at the speed of light. In

view of the principle of light speed invariance introduced by Einstein, if an object travels away

at the speed of light, its time appears to be stationary for the observer. The green vertical

axes with circles represent the frames received from Quarkland by Donald’s telescope. Since

Donald sees Mickey motionless in midair while plunging, what he sees is always the same

frame, called “frame 1” in this example. Frame 1 is seen as the edge of the light cone

widening at the speed of light through time. This is why Quarkland light cones are shown as

small and progressively widening, to the exact extent they leave frame 1 exactly in the Earth’s

position, on Donald’s telescope. This is indicated by the diagram illustrated above. However,

Einstein’s relativity also introduces another principle, i.e. relativity itself. This principle states

the impossibility to determine who is motionless. In other words, each observer may consider

himself as stationary and think that the other bodies are moving. According to this principle,

an observer situated on Quarkland experiences the same physical laws as an observer

situated on Earth. In our example, locally Mickey’s time on Quarkland flows normally at the

speed of light and space co-ordinates remain stationary. In terms of light beams, a light beam

issuing from Quarkland travels at the speed of light for that body; in other words, on

space and time

space and time

Earth

Quarkland

Quarkland frames in the future, but in the past for the Earth

90 70 50 30 20 1

18

Quarkland life continues normally with the same local physical laws as the ones experienced

by Donald on Earth. In the meantime, Mickey has plunged into the water, picked up a little

Quark sand from the bottom, and emerged to the surface. And he has spent more days and

months and years. He is now old, and looks at his nephews who resemble him; yet, his image

is still fixed from Donald’s point of view. The diagram we have proposed, however, is

inadequate because a light beam issuing from Quarkland towards its motion would travel at

twice the speed of light, in contrast to General Relativity. Let us then consider another

diagram of the same situation.

General Relativity requires local time incurvature

In this diagram, Quarkland’s time axis is considered locally for Quarkland. What used to be

the vertical time axis is now the light speed axis. In other words, what Donald on Earth

perceives as Mickey’s time, from the point of view of Mickey on Quarkland is instead light.

What used to be the slanting light speed axis according to Donald’s observations, is now

locally the time axis for Mickey. This diagram shows a time incurvature; the axes with the

circles represent the future frames which never meet in the future those of the other body.

According to this representation, it would seem that no image ever arrives to the other body;

however, it should be noted that each body sees the past of the other, while their futures

never meet simultaneously. In this perspective, the diagram correctly represents the fact that

futures never meet.

time and space

space and time

Earth

Quarkland

Frames of the two planets on their axis

90 70 50 30 10 1

1 10 30 50 70 90

19

Example: conversation between Mickey and Minnie (in examples and notes)

“Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness”


The first diagram, with parallel vertical time axes, shows how Quarkland’s future is perceived

as past from the Earth. In other words, how Mickey’s future is perceived by Donald through

his telescope: as time which has stopped. The first and the second diagram are both

simultaneously correct according to General Relativity. The first diagram, with parallel time

axes, represents vision by an observer who considers himself as stationary. This diagram

should be used to examine how a body is perceived from another’s body position. The

second diagram focuses on the simultaneousness of events: for both bodies, time flows

normally. This diagram should be used to envision life conditions on each body. The frames

are also valid for both diagrams. On the first diagram, Mickey’s frames are perceived by

Donald on Earth. In the second diagram, Mickey’s frames on Quarkland represent the frames

perceived by a spaceship accompanying Quarkland’s motion and therefore having the same

time axis. Inasmuch as time and light are on one and the same level, both diagrams are to be

considered correct for General Relativity. What is the direction of light in one space-time

location is the direction of time in another space-time ambience, and vice versa. The resulting

relativity angle (in examples and notes), measured by the diagram, is 60 temporal degrees in

the fourth dimension. With this angle, what appears to be the Earth’s time axis is

simultaneously the axis of the light speed of signals escaping from Quarkland.

Example: democracy of General Relativity (in examples and notes)

When two bodies are mutually stationary, the two types of diagrams coincide.

20

The parallel time axes cause Mickey’s frames from Quarkland to reach Donald’s telescope on

the Earth at unvaried time intervals, and vice versa. The vertical distances between the two

frames on one axis remain unchanged on the other axis. For Donald, Mickey’s time flows

normally, and vice versa. Having examined the stationary situation, we can now consider an

intermediate case of two planets moving away from each other at an intermediate speed,

lower than light speed.

time

space

Earth Quarkland

90 60 50 30 10 1

space

Quarkland frames

1 10 30 50 70 90

Earth frames

21

As shown by the diagram, this is Donald’s view from the Earth. Looking at the vertical frame

axes (with circles) spacing, the differences in spacing illustrate that the times of life, according

to Donald, are different for the two planets. The diagram shows that, from Donald’s point of

view, Mickey’s time takes longer to flow than his own. However, we go back to our previous

argument: in order to consider life simultaneously on the two planets it is necessary to use the

other diagram. In this other diagram the time streams flow at equal pace on the two planets.

These time flows are represented by the distance between two frames on their own time axis

centered within their light cone:

space and time

space and time

Earth

Quarkland

Quarkland frames

90 70 50 30 10 1 1 10 30 50 70 90

Earth frames

Difference in the way the time between two frames is spaced in the two planets, according to Donald on Earth

22

After these considerations presented in theoretical terms, the discourse can now move on to

evaluate astronomical observations, and review the Big Bang theory and the Standard

Cosmology Model, reinterpreting the compliance with those empirical observations.

Exercises with light cones on the universe horizon


Considering current empirical data, scientists’ observations show that around us all the bodies

move away at the same pace, i.e. they move away according to Hubble law. In 1929, Edwin P.

Hubble of Carnegie Institution first stated that a galaxy’s moving away speed is equal to that

galaxy’s distance multiplied by a constant. Hubble calculated this constant as 500 kilometers

per second per megaparsec (Mps), or for each distance of 3.26 million light years. The

currently estimated value is comprised between 50 and 100 km/s per Mps. The few

calculations in this paper use a value of 80 km/s per Mps. Current observations reach as far

as masses of matter, radio galaxies and quasars, which appear to move away at speeds

higher than 90% the speed of light. The light from those stars takes approximately twelve

billion light years to reach us. They are therefore masses of matter about 12 billion years old.

The Big Bang Theory interprets this interval as the age of the universe. Other trends in

research have estimated the age of some stars at approximately 15 billion light years, which

would make them older than the universe’s 12 billion years. Consequently, the estimated age

of the universe has been moved to 15 billion years, equal to a Hubble constant of 65 km/s per

space and time

space and time

Earth

Quarkland Equal time spacing between two frames, in the ordinary life of the two planet

23

Mps. New observations on pulsar B1757-24 (in examples and notes) question this calculation

as well bringing about measurements that completely disagree with the measures foreseen by

the Standard Model, and as such posing insourmountable problems to preserve credibility of

this model. In any case, the arguments set forth in the paragraphs below apply to any

measurement of these Hubble constant values. Given the value of the distance of the horizon,

the next diagrams consider the stars at the universe horizon. In the previous diagrams, limited

distances were considered; conversely, in the ones below the distance between the stars in

the diagram corresponds to the distance of the Earth from the universe horizon, i.e.

approximately 12 billion light years (or approximately 15). We will call the star on the horizon

Horizon Land:

According to observations, Horizon Land appears to move away at the speed of light.

Flat universes in a curved cosmos


We now go back to the diagram illustrating life on the two planets. The principle of relativity in

General Relativity implies that time flows normally on the two planets. Each of them has its

time axis at a different angle.

Space and time

Space and time

Earth

Horizon Land

Horizon Land frames in the future, past for the Earth

90 70 50 30 20 1

Space-time interval between the stars = 12 billion light years

24

The cosmos as null-whole is “without”, without any characteristic, even without the

characteristic of without. But each human person, each observer, is contained in it;

consequently, the cosmos should somehow curve into null. This incurvature, which is

necessary to account for wholeness in null, is consistent with the presence of the time axis

curvature in the fourth dimension, in accordance with Einstein’s general relativity. As can be

noted in the diagram above, time is curved (divergent time axes). In the example where

Mickey is on Quarkland moving away at light speed, time is curved by an actual speed, with a

limited distance from Earth. The resulting effect is an apparent curvature of the cosmos.

Conversely, for Horizon Land we can assume that the planet is static: time is curved by the

cosmos’ curvature rather than by light speed, which causes an apparent movement of the star

(in examples and notes) at the speed of light.

Energy

required

Movement at light

speed

Curved time Cosmos

incurvature

Spaceship nearby, passing at

light speed Infinite Actual Actual Apparent

Star on the universehorizon,

static in relation to the Earth None Apparent Actual Actual

time and space

space and time

Earth

Horizon Land

Frames of the two planets on their time axis

90 70 50 30 10 1

1 10 30 50 70 90

25

The difference between the two situations lies in the energy required to produce time

incurvature. The spaceship passing at light speed requires infinite energy, as has been shown

in particle accelerator laboratories, to reach and maintain that speed. This model interprets

the star on the observable horizon as stationary in its natural position in the cosmos, and

therefore without the need of any further energy addition. How can this situation be

illustrated? Precisely by the diagrams shown above. They apply to both situations: to local,

actually dynamic situations, as well as to remote, static, apparently dynamic situations. The

discourse can now underline that the diagram with the parallel time axes represents the way

each person sees the cosmos: as the observed universe. For this type of physics we need to

use different geometries from Riemann’s, as the Standard Cosmology Model actually does.

The diagram with time axes on different angles shows how the two stars live in the cosmos.

For this type of physics, Riemann’s geometry is appropriate. In the paragraphs below we will

examine how, based on this form, the cosmos as whole can actually curve in the null. This

incurvature is another manner of seeing the obliteration of the whole which is the cosmos into

the null. We will now proceed to infer a model of the wholeness of the whole.

Optical effects of the cosmos curvature


As optical effects of the cosmos curvature, consider Quarkland passing at 90% the speed of

light near the Earth, and at the same time consider Quasi-Horizon Land at a distance of 90%

the distance of the horizon from us. In the perspective described, it is impossible to distinguish

between the two which one is traveling at 90% the speed of light near us and which is

stationary at 90% the distance of the horizon from us. In addition, a Quasi-Horizon Land at

90% the distance of the horizon, traveling towards us at 90% the speed of light would appear

near and stationary, whereas in actual fact it would be approaching from a great distance.

Cosmos curvature in time


The arguments expounded so far provide a basis for measuring the curvature of the cosmos,

in this model. In the case of a spaceship taking a straight line direction to reach a star on the

horizon, the model described envisages another local horizon in that distant point, equidistant

and similar to the Earth’s; from there, our representation can continue in the same direction,

to reach the next horizon where there is another planet (assuming we are lucky and find it just

on that trajectory), and so on. The resulting diagram is the following:

26

Six consecutive horizons derive from this exercise, represented by a hexagon in a two-

dimensional illustration. This is if we just consider the cones of the past. The question may

arise whether the cosmos actually returns onto itself. It might be rather more like a spiral

curvature where one never returns onto onself. This hypothesis will be overlooked for the

moment. The paragraphs below help dissolve this doubt. The diagram describes a model that

brings back the curvature onto itself. This means that a spaceship departing from the North

Pole heading “upwards” in a straight line towards any direction in the cosmos, would come

back to the Earth after a certain number of light years, from the opposite direction, “from

below”, as it were, landing on the South Pole (assuming it finds the Earth still alive).

The complete three-dimensional development of the figure showing three-dimensional cones

tangent to each other is represented by a discontinuous surface, because it is impossible to

obtain a three-dimensional continuous shape having only equilateral triangles and hexagonal

figures. The diagram proposed above, therefore, is just a three-dimensional section which can

prove useful for visualizing: three-dimensional light cones considered only along a two-

27

dimensional plane. A coherent diagram would be either a complete three-dimensional one, or

a completely two-dimensional one. Since it is impossible to have a complete continuous three-

dimensional diagram equivalent from any observation angle, a diagram which is consistent as

to dimensions is the two-dimensional one, as shown below:

It should be noted that this diagram only considers a plane two-dimensional directrix of a

three-dimensional model of a four-dimensional cosmos. Additionally, on this trajectory only the

planets on the horizons of the respective events are considered. If all the event cones are

multiplied and drawn closer, the so formed diagram illustrate that reciprocally static

simultaneous events at sufficiently small space distance lie on a circumference.

28

This circumference becomes a sphere when all the infinite time-directrixes are considered. On

this sphere, let us take a number of intersection planes having any angle; on each of these

planes, we will consider the hexagon having its vertexes on the sphere, and on the hexagon

we will build the three-dimensional light cones on the directrix of that particular plane.

It should be noted that the three-dimensional sphere thus obtained is different from a sphere

like the Earth, in that the Earth is a sphere having three space dimensions, whereas this

sphere has two space dimensions and one time dimension. It is a three-dimensional

representation of a four-dimensional cosmos.

Time-retreat within the cosmos


As we have seen, the graphic calculations determine the curvature of the cosmos. The model

involved differs from the Standard Cosmology Model, which interprets data according to a flat

29

universe expanding from an initial Big Bang. Rather than contrasting the two models, it should

be considered how the Whole-Null Cosmos model confirms the Big Bang Theory as theory of

the observed universe, making a distinction between the flat, observable universe, and the

static, curve unobservable cosmos. The latter is the relevant one in case of cosmic journeys

by spaceship. The model determines fixed quantities: the degrees of relativity angles, 60

temporal degrees in the fourth dimension by the events’ cosmological horizon in relation to the

observer. With respect to empirical observations, scientists state that the observed universe

expands: the calculations determine that on the horizon stars move away at the speed of light,

consistently with astronomers’ observation of galaxies uniformly moving away from each

other. The distance from the horizon should be considered more accurately as an interval: the

interval between two relativity angles. According to this interpretation, the interval increases

and spacially-temporally separates any two events considered. The Whole-Null Cosmos

model which is being presented argues that this interval increases because of the temporal

rather than the spacial distancing. According to this interpretation, space taken by itself is

plane and the stars remain equidistant.

Stars’ spacial

position

Cause of the increased

interval between stars

Incurvature

Standard Cosmology

Model Expansive Spacial distancing Plane Universe

Whole-Null Cosmology

Model Static Temporal Incurvature Plane Universes in

a curved Cosmos

The interval increases more than proportionately to each increase in the considered star’s

distance from the observer. It is an accumulation of temporal delays between spacially fixed

stars, in proportion to the distance. This is why if we only look at the distances what we

perceive is a dynamic of spacial retreat, whereas what occurs is a temporal incurvature.

Astronomical observations are forced to overlook time incurvature, because cosmic rays travel

linearly in a curved cosmos. Thus, to the curved cosmos’ observer the universe appears to be

plane. This is why the observation of the universe differs from the cosmos relativity theory.

This interpretation explains the light’s shifting towards red in the spectrum as an effect of

cosmos curvature in time in the fourth dimension, rather than star retreat. To verify this theory

we should wait long enough and measure the fact that the red shift effect remains static,

frozen, showing that stars, galaxies, appear to be moving away, but actually remain

equidistant. In this perspective, the shifting towards red is interpreted as an appearance of

events resulting from the galaxies’ retreat in the time of space-time, rather than in space.

Cosmos curvature diagram


30

The observed universe describes the observer’s point of view, the cosmos describes the

simultaneousness of events mutually static in space, but mutually retreating in time and

therefore in space-time. The discourse now outlines the diagram to visualize the cosmos

curvature.

The circumference shown above, formed by the description of multiple light cones, , illustrates

how stars’ time directrix curves continuously in proportion to the distance from the observation

point. As the diagram evidences, the stars are positioned on the cosmos curvature shown in

the diagram. However, the images of the stars that reach Earth, with the cosmic rays on the

speed light directrix, follow a straight route, and therefore convey an image of a flat cosmos.

On the circumference lie the instants which are simultaneous to the observer. On the linear

directrix of the cosmic rays of Earth’s past lie visible instants which are past for the observer.

On the circumference there are the events which are simultaneous to the Earthevent, and we

can see that they are invisible to this event, being outside the surface of the cone of the

event’s past. Only on the events’ horizon, on Horizon Land, simultaneous events are the same

as past events. They are simultaneous pasts of the events on the cosmological horizon (in

examples and notes). However, they are motionless for the observer, assuming he could see

them. In actual fact, today’s observations allow to nearly reach that horizon, as far as

approximately 90% of the distance.

Time and space

Space and time

Earth

Horizon Land

Curved cosmos: curved

line of simultaneous

universes.

Flat universe: straight line of

Earth’s universe.

31

Time relativity of events and simultaneous time for events3


Now Einstein relativity is examined in two different situations. From the observer point of view

(Donal’s), as indicated in the diagrams, the pasts of other events (on his light cone) become

present to the observer. In other words, the past of other events is visible as present. Donald

sees the past of Uncle Scrooge on a nearby planet. If Uncle Scrooge is considered as

observer, the events he observes (on his light cone) are different from those observed by

Donald. This is what Einstein relativity describes. In other words, if As(at time t) is the event

considered as given, and Bs(at time t-x) is an event seen as present by As(at time t), then Bs(at time t-x)

sees an event As(at time t-z) past to the starting As(at time t) event. Considering then also another

event Cs(at time t-w) that is seen as present by Bs(at time t-x), which is seen as present by the As(at

time t), then, in the majority of cases, Cs(at time t-w) is invisible to the starting As(at time t) event. Cs(at

time t-w) is present to the starting As(at time t) if it is on the continuation of the observational axis

between As(at time t) and Bs(at time t-x) (see diagram here below).

Passing from these considerations to considering the normal life flow on the two planets, any

given event also has simultaneous events. The simultaneous events are reciprocally invisible. 3 This paragraph has been added on 15 September 2001

Time and space

Space and time

Earth

Horizon Land

Curved cosmos: curved

line of simultaneous

universes.

Flat universe: straight line of

Earth’s universe.

t t

t t-x

t-w

t-z

Cs

Bs

As

As Bs

Cs

32

Nonetheless simultaneousness can be described thinking that a considered event and any

other relative to this are simultaneous when they are reciprocally reached by the light of the

other event after an identical lap of local time in the future. As such, for each considered event

there is a whole series of simultaneous events. The characteristic within this set of

simultaneous events is that, taken an event As(at time t), if Bs(at time t) is simultaneous to As(at time t)

and Cs(at time t) is simultaneous to Bs(at time t), then Cs(at time t) is also simultaneous to As(at time t) (a

circle represents time t on the diagram). This means that the whole series of simultaneous

events is common for any of those simultaneous events considered as given. This happens

for events that are within the distance of an observer from his cosmological horizon.

Regarding the information of two events separated exactly by the distance of an observer

from his cosmological horizon, these two are perfectly tangent to each other without ever

communicating, and the light flow emitted by one body towards the other body in the future is

parallel to the time flow of this other body so that the two axis are parallel. The events that

originated such signals are considered both simultaneous. Furthermore, each one at the

horizon limit touches the other body past as present. In other words, the two bodies, if they

saw each other, would be reciprocally present. This concurrency is a paradox and would help

explain why it is impossible to see the bodies at the horizon. The discourse has to note that

this reasoning has to be applied on the diagrams representing the life on the two bodies

instead than on the diagram representing one body as seen from another. Simultaneousness

can also apply to two reciprocally moving events, for which the light of each reaches the other

after an identical lap of local time. If these events were though to come to a sudden halt with

respect to each other, the previous simultaneousness would disappear creating different

simultaneousnesses. Based on these premises and considering reciprocally static

bodies/events, if for example the time-axis rotation in which events are considered turns

counter-clockwise, for events infinitely near to the ones initially considered, the positions

identified are all the light-time (or space-time) coordinates of the cosmos, so that the time

coordinate is common for all events and this simultaneousness is valid. This is simultaneous

time. In philosophical terms, it should be specified that the character discussed is

simultaneousness rather than present. In fact, these events are mutually absent. The present

is a concept related to the past – it is the past of other events which becomes present to the

observer. Consequently, simultaneousness and present have very different philosophical

meanings, and for the purposes of this discussion also very different physical meanings. Cosmos space-time circumference


If mankind resists the temptation to destroy itself, perhaps one day the human progeny will

tour the horizons of events to come back to the starting point from the opposite direction, just

like the explorers of the seas once did on our planet. At this point, the investigation may

concentrate on the possibility to measure the cosmos circumference. This is a circumference

of events, rather than a circumference of space, and it is measured by space-time intervals,

33

rather than space distances. As mentioned before, the diagram has only two space

dimensions and the time dimension, whereas the General Relativity cosmos has four

dimensions. However, the attention may focus on a rectilinear journey, for which the

dimensions included in the diagram are sufficient. The discrepancy between the diagram’s

dimensions and the four dimensions of General Relativity remind of the fact that the center of

the diagram is different from the center of cosmos, which will be discussed at a later stage.

The proceeding now consists in performing the geometric measurements. Graphically, the

measure of the radius originating from the center of the model is the same as the interval

between the event from where we observe and the horizon of events we look at, as the

relativity angle is 60 temporal degrees and results in the formation of a hexagon whose sides

are equal to the radius. With an 80 km/s/Mps Hubble constant the interval between event and

event horizon is 12 billion 225 milllion light years. The measurement is in terms of light years,

i.e. space-time interval. The circumference having such a radius with be equal to twice the

radius multiplied by ∏.

Therefore, the interval required to circumnavigate the cosmos, based on the chosen Hubble

constant, takes approximately 77 billion years, traveling at the speed of light.


III ACTION OF THE FORCE OF ABSENCE OF THE ELSEWHERE

The cosmos as whole-null paradox and the two basic “meta-dimensions” (go to Table of Contents)

In all the arguments set forth above, the concept of space was left in the background. The

discourse has illustrated time and light cones - space is implied in these concepts. The

reasoning might object that light is measured by a certain space traveled in a certain time.

However, space can arise from light and time: space is the speed which light has for a certain

time, between two selected events. Cosmological discourse necessarily implies dimensions;

speaking of space only secondarily to time and light prompts to attempt a definition of the

cosmos dimensions as time and light. The interaction of these two dimensions produces the

perception of the space dimension. In a cosmos where totality is simultaneously nullity, the

aggregate of all events, including the observing scientist and the observation instrument,

mutually cancel each other in the null. In this perspective the mind may have less difficulties

Event circumference interval in light years = 12,225,000,000*2*Π = 76.811.940.380

34

than usual to think of space as an induced perception. Or, the depiction may assert that space

occupies null space in the cosmos totality, in accordance with Whole-Null Cosmos. However,

the observer perceives space in that he is a part of the cosmos observing the universe (his

own universe). The observer’s time flows at light speed, because the particles that compose it

vibrate at the speed of light. The past of events is communicated to the observer by means of

light. Let us now think of light reaching the observer, and how the observer lacks the

awareness of his own time. The observer’s time is so much a part of his existence as to be

taken for granted. The time inherent in light is thus forgotten, and only what is left of the

speed of light is perceived, i.e. space. From the interaction of these two dimensions arise

therefore the three spatial dimensions in the form of perception of spatial distance. General

Relativity envisages four dimensions: three spatial and one temporal dimension, while within

the context here presented, two “meta-dimensions” can be identified, i.e. light and time, which

give rise to the four traditional dimensions, three spatial and one temporal.

Six light directrixes and six time directrixes, totaling twelve dimensions


The cosmos curvature diagram can now be re-examined. As already discussed, a universe

within the cosmos is represented by a light cone, whose center is on the observation point – in

our case, Earth – and the outer edge coinciding with the horizon of events, observed through

astronomic examination instruments. The axis at the center of the light cone is the time axis.

The direction of light flows on the surface of the light cone. The light cone is the light axis. The

diagram shows that, within the proposed model, a second universe lies at the first universe’s

cosmological horizon. Due to the cosmos incurvature, this second universe implies a time

direction parallel to the luminous dimension, i.e. light, of the first universe. Conversely, the

luminous dimension (light) of the second universe, in the direction towards the first universe,

is parallel to the first universe’s time dimension. The same applies to each adjacent pair of

universes in the cosmos.

35

Considering how the totality of the cosmos is annulled in the nullity of the null, and how the

spatial dimension is a perceivable appearance deriving from the light and time dimensions,

the cosmos curvature diagram can be stylized by removing the space dimensions.

36

As the diagram shows, moving from a time directrix there are six directions in the time

dimension and six directions in the light dimension. Each universe has its opposite, in the

sense that the two time directions of the two universes are opposite, and the same is true for

the the two light dimensions: one universe’s cone of the past has the same direction as the

other universe’s cone of the future, and vice versa. As a result, the dimensions annul each

other leading to the null. Once again, the model of the cosmos as simultaneous identity of

whole and null is confirmed. However, being a part of this whole and experiencing his own

presence in only one of the six universes of the cosmos, the observer perceives light and time

(and therefore space) in a specific time-light dimension. The other dimensions are hidden. An

observer traveling to the horizon of the Earth’s universe (in other words, the universe

observed from the Earth) in one direction, would find himself in another unverse, with a new

cosmological horizon. Two new dimensions, time and light, would be visible, while the

previous dimensions would be hidden. This representation of the cosmos considers six time

directrixes and six light directrixes, for a total of twelve directrixes. Each directrix corresponds

to a dimension. In this view, the total number of dimensions in the cosmos is twelve. Let us

now examine the Superstring Theory, which envisages eleven dimensions. The number of

dimensions is very close. Are there any similarities between the two models? Superstring Theory and Whole-Null model


37

The Superstring Theory is based on eleven dimensions4. Ten dimensions are spatial and one

is temporal. Of the ten spatial dimensions, only three are visible, while the others are rolled on

themselves, on equal or smaller distances than Planck distance. All of these dimensions act,

part of them covertly. The hidden dimensions are invisible to direct empirical scientific

observation.

In the model of the cosmos as whole-null, there are twelve dimensions, six of which are

temporal and six luminous (i.e. of light). Each pair of time-light dimensions involves three

space dimensions and one time dimension. Considering space and time, there are 24 sub-

dimensions, 6 of which are temporal and 18 spatial. However, as the three space directions

originate from the interaction between the luminous dimension (of light) and the temporal

dimension, we may consider only the twelve basic dimensions. At this point, it could prove

interesting to apply the Superstring Theory to the Whole-Null Cosmos model.

The four-dimensional hypersphere unveils a twelve-dimensional cosmos


The twelve dimensions provide the coordinates of how Riemann’s four-dimensional

hypersphere returns onto itself endlessly. Therefore, both representations are mutually

consistent. Riemann’s hypersphere examines how the three space dimensions and the

temporal dimension are visibly experienced by the observer in a six light-dimensional and six

time-dimensional cosmos returning onto itself endlessly. In the paragraphs below the

discussion will talk about a four-dimensional cosmos to indicate its Riemann hypersphere

visible structure, with four dimensions indicating the three spatial dimensions and one

temporal dimension. By contrast, talking about twelve-dimensional cosmos indicates both the

visible parts of the cosmos as present cosmological horizon, and the invisible parts as five

adjacent and absent cosmological horizons. The discussion will also evaluate the way in

which this absence acts on the presence.

Twelve dimension theory as parameter of reference


In order to adapt the String Theory to the Whole-Null Cosmos conformation, the target model

would have to start from an eleven dimensions string theory and add one dimension , then it

should expound how to shift from space-time dimensions to time-light dimensions. Within the

framework of the whole-null model of the cosmos, the reasoning can indicate a few

considerations on the possible results expected from a twelve-dimension theory. The theory

would describe a whole-totality cosmos annulling itself in the nullity of the null. The expected

4 The string theory started off as a five-dimension theory and evolved into ten-dimension theories, with nine spacial and one time dimension. Five such theories are currently proposed: Type I (more accurately, Type I SO(32)), Heterotic-O (more accurately, Heterotic SO(32)), Heterotic-E (more accurately, Heterotic E8xE8), Type IIA, Type IIB. 11-dimension Supergravity has also been related to these five theories. Taken together the six theories form the M-Theory, or 11-dimension Superstring theory. A major initiating theoretical contribution to this systematization has been provided by Edward Witten of the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study.

38

outcome therefore is the mutual annihilation of the fundamental parameters. Scientists and

other observers need partial results such as a distance from a star, rather than the balancing

of mutual annulment between measurements and variables. A similar theory, as cosmological

theory, lacks such partial results; in itself, therefore, it would be useless. The twelve-

dimension theory would describe the wholeness of the cosmos, and would remain useless for

the observer’s practical purposes. In parallel, in itself a theory describing the universe

observed from within the twelve-dimension cosmos would be isolated, without reference. In

fact, it is easy to see how the observer observes his universe in the cosmos without any

reference points, because he ignores how to interpret his own influence on his observations. If

we take numbers as an example, mathematics always considers zero as a numerical term of

reference. In itself, zero is useless, but without it all numbers have only a limited use. The

same applies to a twelve-dimension cosmos theory. In itself it would be useless, but the

theories that describe the universe without this theory lack a term of reference: too many

parameters and values could be equally taken into account without a term of reference. Acting

as such term, the twelve-dimension cosmos theory would enable to select between the

possible theories of the observed universe, so that certain parameters and values may be

accepted and the others rejected. The resulting theory of the universe would be stable and

clarifying, able to tell if and how to travel away from the Earth in inter-galactic shuttles.

Cosmos light-time circumference


In the paragraphs above the cosmos’ space-time circumference has been calculated on the

basis of the Standard Cosmology Model as approximately 77 billion light years. By contrast, in

terms of Whole-Null cosmos space is absent, as shown in the figure above, and it is an

experience induced on the observer. Space is the name of the sensation experienced by the

observer both with respect to energy and to this energy’s direction, required to change time

and light position. The observer’s body matter evolves both in time and in light. The traveled

space is the appearance of the actual shifting of light coordinates, as a result of which the

observer receives a different series of cosmic radiations. In this twelve-dimension

construction, the shifting in space can be considered as the stationary observer who produces

action for which light coordinates change, causing the experience of moving through space.

For example, the observer rents an inter-galactic spaceship and makes it emit energy to travel

in the cosmos. The space-time circumference is inappropriate and inaccurate in this model. In

terms of Whole-Null Cosmos expressed with a six light-dimension and six time-dimension

string theory, it is more appropriate to talk about light-time circumference, in other words a

constant winding of a pair of time-light dimensions, while an adjacent pair of time-light

dimensions simultaneously unwinds, so that the sum of all the six pairs of time-light

dimensions gives a total of five completely wound, invisible pairs, and one completely

unwound pair. This pair can be viewed as an aggregation of two pairs: one pair is winding,

39

while the adjacent pair is unwinding. In this cosmological description, scientists could find the

way to move by winding the pair of cosmos dimensions in which they are stationary, so as to

unwind an adjacent pair of time-light dimensions in a given directrix of observation of the

cosmos, in order to move the time-light coordinates in easier ways than the ones known so

far. The cosmos curvature has been measured in the previous paragraphs as a 60 temporal

degree curvature of a pair of time-light dimensions on the cosmological horizon. Thus,

considering a directrix of motion in the cosmos, the journey can be measured along that

directrix, through the six time-light dimensional pairs as a variation of 360 temporal degrees or

of 360 light degrees. At the end of this journey, in line with the illustrated calculations the

journey arrives at the initial departing position, arriving from the direction opposite the

departing one (an ant crawling on a rectilinear course on a ball returns to its starting point

from the opposite direction).

Fantasizing on inter-galactic journeys via time-light: Star Trek


The description above regarding potential inter-galactic journeys reminds us of the Star Trek

saga. In this popular series, spaceships take a direction and then travel in hyperspace to

reach inter-galactic distances enormous to us in an extremely short time and using very little

energy. Will it be possible one day to move around in space in this way? Perhaps. If it were

possible to control the time-light degrees and unwind a pair of time-light dimensions,

simultaneously winding the pair in which we are located, we could travel in a different manner

from the one we have known so far.

Black holes, string theory and inter-galactic corridors


The string theory leads to the unexpected result of null mass for black holes. This is viewed

as a snag in the string theory. Instead, we should consider the possibility of a snag in the

black hole theory of the Standard Cosmology Model. The Whole-Null cosmos model leads to

different interpretations, and therefore suggests a possible rethinking of the black hole theory.

Current astrophysical theories consider the possibility of curved space corridors connecting

remote points in the cosmos. This sort of shortcuts are theoretically possible, however they

are usually considered different from black holes. Black holes’ null mass highlighted by string

theory allows us to think of black holes as the hyperspace corridors that have been theorized.

In this hypothesis, black holes and hyperspace corridors would be two different names for the

same astrophysical phenomenon. The Whole-Null Cosmos model views the observable

universe’s horizon of events as similar to the black hole’s horizon of events. In both cases

time is still for the observer, and the stars that are near them seem to travel towards them at

speeds close to light speed. For both of them, this approaching of the nearby stars may

suggest that the mass beyond that horizon is an infinite mass, which for this reason attracts

nearby matter at speeds close to light speed. The Whole-Null Cosmos model interprets these

40

movements at speeds close to light speed as apparent movements of stationary stars, due to

the effect of the cosmos curvature in time-light, both with respect to the cosmological horizon

of events, and to the black hole’s horizon of events. In terms of Whole-Null Cosmos Theory,

still time means 60 time/light degrees in the visible time-light dimensions, out of 360 total

degrees of visible and invisible twelve time-ligth dimensions, in relation to the observation

point. This measure indicates a total shifting to another pair of time-light dimensions. In

accordance with String Theory calculations, this supports the interpretation of black holes as

null mass hyperspace corridors, leading quickly and in a short time from one cosmological

horizon to another.

Hidden dimensions in terms of action of the absence of the elsewhere


We can now examine hidden dimensions. Two dimensions are present and visible, light and

time in our universe, which is to say in our cosmological horizon. String and membrane

theories describe six or seven hidden dimension, which act without being visible. Thoughts

may note how an explanation of Heisenberg’s Indetermination Principle consists in describing

indetermination in terms of today’s String Theory: some variables of atomic and subatomic

particle behavior are invisible because they reside in the wound dimensions. An example

consists in a very common human experience, that of a beloved person whom we have lost or

is far away. That person is invisible, or rather is absent. This absence, however, acts. A loved

one fills with meaning our everyday thoughts and actions, in one sense or another. Actions

are influenced by this experience, made up partly by memories, i.e. by the past, partly by how

those memories and the longing to see that person act in the present. Each person decides

how to live that absence and how to act in the event of that person’s possible return. These

expectations, dreams, memories, processing of feelings act with incredible strength on the

person’s everyday life. Absence, therefore, acts on presence, although it is invisible. Similarly,

the hidden and invisible laws of subatomic particles’ movements may be described as the

force of invisible absence. Some invisible event acts on individual particles’ momentum and

position; it acts on the energy status and on the time required for that energy status to

change5. The ten hidden dimensions (five light dimensions and five time dimensions) can be

viewed as absent, insofar as they are invisible to the observer. Interpretation may find natural

to consider some connection, or similarity, or direct interaction between these invisible hidden

dimensions and the invisible actions acting on subatomic particles. How can dimensions

hidden beyond the cosmological horizon act on the invisible parts of a particle here and now?

The considerations from which to proceed can be based on Heisenberg’s Indetermination

Principle.

5 The product of the uncertainties of one of the two couples of quantities is equal to or greater than h/2∏, where h equals Planck’s constant

41

Matter-energy in terms of time-light in a string theory (go to Table of Contents)

The interpretation proposed in the pages above replaces the traditional three space

dimensions and one time dimensions with a light dimension and a time dimension. Within the

current String Theory, matter-energy is theorized as supplementary space dimensions wound

around themselves. This is also applied to the Whole-Null Cosmos model: matter-energy is

viewed as being composed of time and light dimensions wound around themselves. In other

words, the five hidden light dimensions and the five time dimensions, hidden as absent here

but present as visible in other cosmological horizons, behave here as matter-energy. Rather

than space-time and matter-energy, therefore, we can simply speak of light-time. Time and

light unwound behave like time and light. Time and light wound around themselves behave

like matter and energy.

Heisenberg’s Indetermination Principle and the force of absence


In its nullity, the Cosmos as Whole-Null lacks light and time and space. This, as well as the

simultaneous presence of both the Null and the disaggregation of the Null in the wholeness of

the Whole, imply means by which communication between parts of the cosmos may occur at

speeds higher than light speed. In detail, the operation requires for the Wholeness of the

Whole to be allowed to simultaneously lead to the Nullity of the Null. The solution involves

communications without time delays between the parts of the Cosmos wholeness, beyond

time, before the immediately. This action is beyond the empirical experience: the observer is a

part of the Whole, and therefore experiences life conditions that are different from the

transcendent behavior of the cosmic Whole-Null. The discussion can now consider the

behavior of absence from a logical-philosophical point of view. Matter-energy in space-time

beyond the cosmological horizon is absent to the observer. In terms which are equivalent but

more in accordance with the descriptions in the paragraphs above, time-light (experienced by

us in the form of matter-energy in space-time) beyond the cosmological horizon is absent to

the observer. For the sake of simplicity, however, we use the traditional terms matter-energy

in space-time. The absence of time lacks the limitations of time, and therefore can act before

the immediately, outside time. The absence of space lacks the limitations of space, and

therefore can act without spatial limitations, before the immediately. The absence of matter

lacks the limitations of matter and therefore can act, outside the limitations of matter, before

the immediately. The absence of energy lacks the limitations of energy, and therefore can act

before the immediately, outside the limitations of energy. In general, the absence of matter-

energy and absence of space-time lacks these limitations and acts outside time and space

and energy and matter. However, as shown by the everyday experience of events perceived

as absent (e.g. the loss of a loved one), absence acts with a force of its own, the force of

absence. In parallel, Heisenberg’s Indetermination Principle can be interpreted as the law of

action of the force of absence on subatomic particles. As an extreme, we can think of the

42

cosmos as split into two aggregates, on the one side a particle and on the other the Cosmos

Wholeness except that particle. To the single particle, all the rest of the cosmos is absent.

That particle is partly visible in its matter-energy components in space-time. On the other

hand, wherever matter-energy components in space time are missing within the particle, that

is where the force of the absence of the remaining cosmos concentrates. This absence

manifests itself in the particle’s probabilistic behavior. All the rest of the cosmos concentrates

in that particle as invisible acting of the force of absence. We can now consider an aggregate

of several particles as a mountain. The aggregate of its particles is an aggregate of matter-

energy in space-time, imbued in an aggregate of absence of matter-energy and absence of

space-time. This absence is the concentration of the absence of all the rest of the Whole-Null

cosmos, except that mountain. The absence manifests itself in the behavior of that mountain’s

particles. In general, considering the cosmos as split in two parts, in each of these parts the

other part’s matter-energy in space-time manifests itself invisibly in the considered part, in

the form of force of absence. In other words, absence here is presence elsewhere; presence

here simultaneously implies absence elsewhere. This philosophical description of

Heisenberg’s Indetermination Principle is consistent within the model of the Cosmos as

Whole-Null Paradox.

The force of absence is Cosmic Spirit (go to Table of Contents)

The arguments set forth above indicate an invisible force. Hidden forces are conceived of in

virtually all cultures and religions. They are usually called “spirit”, however no verifiable

physical description has been made of them. By contrast, the invisible force thus identified

can be proved, though still within the framework of Heisenberg’s indetermination, with

mathematical formulas by which predictions can be checked against cosmological

observations. In this perspective, the force of absence is here referred to as “cosmic spirit”, or

the invisible force of absence of matter, absence of energy, absence of space, absence of

time.

The observer’s force in the cosmos


As a result of these arguments, we may be prompted to reconsider observer’s role in the

cosmos. The human body is made up of particles. The human conscience is the result of a

logical combination of nervous impulses also affected by hormone interactions. These are

also made up of particles. Thus, the force of absence of all the rest of the Cosmos acts both

in the human body and in the human conscience. The discourse can reverse the idea and

consider how, in this perspective, all the rest of the Cosmos is subject to the force of the

observing scientist’s absence. The inspection can add to this consideration the question of the

43

Cosmos Wholeness-Nullity. Observer plus the rest of the Cosmos constitute the wholeness

which is annulled in the invariable nullity of the Null, the absence of all components, including

the absence of the absence. Thus, considering the Null, the observer comes to be the

opposite of the rest of the cosmos, whereas considering the whole, the observer comes to be

the complement of all the rest of the Cosmos. In this perspective, the infinitesimal man is

exactly half of the Cosmos. A single atom is also exactly half of the cosmos. This view

overturns the current cosmological view, according to which the observer, the human person,

is an almost insignificant infinitesimal in the cosmos.

Limitations to the observer’s cosmic power: universes intersections


If on the one hand these thoughts may be daunting in connection with the observer’s

potential, on the other hand the discourse should scrutiny when the observer can express this

power of his. Everyday experience shows humans with their limitations, unable to move a

mountain or dry up the sea or cool the sun. Why is this? A first convincing reason may be the

fact that the force of absence is mysterious and therefore impossible to direct in any chosen

direction. Another good reason could be represented by the fact that the Cosmos Wholeness-

Nullity is transcendent, and as such can only by experienced through mysticism, mystic

meditation, and Christian love according to the Christians. In other words, the wholeness of

the cosmos can only be experienced by those who are in harmony with the rest of the

cosmos, without imposing themselves on the surroundings. In cosmological terms, harmony in

a human person occurs when the presence of matter-energy in the presence of space-time

comes into harmony with the absence of matter-energy and absence of space-time, whenever

that human person respects every partiality that comes in contact with her. In this case, that

person respects all the intersections between the single cosmos’ infinite universes. Therefore,

only in this case the person’s actions in her presence respect the force of absence of the

actions actually performed elsewhere by others, and allow her to express her nature as half of

the Cosmos Wholeness-Nullity. In this perspective, with an obvious reference to the scriptures

of the Christians, a mountain can be moved only if this can be accepted/desired by everyone.

In other words, a striving for power over the rest of the cosmos drives the person away from

harmony, because of lack of respect (Christians would describe it as charity) towards others

(whether events or people), and conversely, a desire to respect the rest of the cosmos is a

prerequisite to approach harmony between presence and the invisible action of the force of

absence. After establishing this necessary logical-philosophical link between the sociology of

human behavior and the physics of the cosmos, the discourse can go back to consider how

the hidden parts of the cosmos can transmit their forces on the observer.

44

Relativity; Escher, Maurits Cornelis (1898-1972) Fantasizing on matter, energy and dark forces: Star Wars


Darkness evokes an ancestral fear, as our illustrious primitive forefathers knew when they lit

the fire. In general, events hidden in darkness escape control. Physics has identified events

which escape the scientist’s empirical control. These events have been described through the

concept of darkness. Scientists speak of dark matter and dark energy. No direct empirical

experiment can be applied to these entities. Our imagination turns to the concepts of darkness

used in the Star Wars saga. The famous quotes, “may the force be with you” and “he chose

the dark side of force”, are now generally understood. The expression “dark side” of force

recalls the concept of evil. Darkness appears to be connected to evil and light connected to

good. In these pages we must use the concept of darkness without relating it to the concept of

evil. To avoid being in contrast to the concept of “dark side”, the following meanings are

introduced:

1) Dark side of dark matter: evil side of a mysterious hidden force

2) Clear side of dark matter: good side of a mysterious hidden force

3) Dark side of visible matter: e.g. the evil aspects of a visible person

4) Clear side of visible matter: e.g. the good aspects of a visible person

In these pages there will be no dwell on the concept of “dark side” or “clear side” of matter,

energy and forces, whether dark or visible. In terms of the concepts introduced by Star Wars,

45

these pages remain neutral, and leave it up to each person to make their ethical choices, as

their preference for the dark or clear side of the mysterious forces which are examined in this

paper. Dark matter according to the Standard Model


Scientists have calculated that visible matter, added to that which can be estimated around

visible stars, is insufficient to explain the observed orbs of galaxies, planet systems, and

planets in cosmic space. These movements involve much greater forces than those

corresponding to the mass found in the galaxies of the universe. In November 1989 Nasa

launched the satellite COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer), to measure background

radiations from the cosmos (first discovered by Nobel prize winners Arno Penzias and Robert

Wilson). Within the Big Bang Standard Cosmology Theory, these radiations are viewed as

residues of the Big Bang. The results obtained in 1992 show insufficient matter to account for

the formation of galaxies. Measurements estimate an amount of matter constituting, at most,

10% of the universe, with an amount of dark matter approximately nine times as the amount of

known matter. Recently, the presence of dark matter has been confirmed by analyzing the

effect of gravitational distortion on approximately 145,000 very remote galaxies. This result

has been obtained by the researchers of the National Science Foundation (NSF), using the

“Big Throughput Camera” especially designed and installed on the four-meter telescope of the

Cerro Tololo (Chile) inter-American observatory. Dark matter is generally viewed by physicists

as matter which, though invisible, is all contained in our cosmological horizon, i.e. in our

universe.

Dark energy and quintessence according to the Standard Model


At present, a new trend in research suggests a different explanation for the insufficiency of

matter in the conformation of the universe. Matter, plus chemical physical elements total only

about one third of what was estimated according to physical theories. The two missing thirds

need to be accounted for. Thus, some scientists involved in this study identify a new element,

dark energy, different from dark matter. The characteristic of dark energy is its repulsive

gravity, different from the attractive gravity of dark matter and chemical elements loose in the

universe. This dark energy is called Quintessence6, in recollection of the four elements

identified by ancient Greek philosophers, air, water, earth and fire, plus an etheric substance

which prevented the stars from falling to the Earth. The quintessence’s repulsive gravity

exceeds the attractive gravity of matter, whether visible or dark, according to the Standard

Cosmology Model of an expanding universe. More recent measurements show an

accelerating expansion: the greater amount of repulsive gravity compared to attractive gravity

6 Ostriker, Jeremiah P. and Steinhardt, Paul J.; The Quintessential Universe; in “Scientific American”; gennaio 2001

46

applies a constant acceleration force to the universe’s expansion. Current studies are

describing the characteristics of this quintessence. In simple terms, taken a cubic meter of

empty universe space, without any matter or radiation, the dark energy is allegedly present in

this cubic meter of vacuum. This concept is very similar to the one of Cosmological Constant

introduced by Einstein to balance his cosmological calculations. The difference between

Quintessence and Cosmological Constant is in the universe’s dynamics. The former applies to

an expanding universe, whereas Einstein’s refers to a static universe. The Cosmological

Constant was such as to represent a repulsion factor opposing exactly the gravitational

attraction of matter in the universe. The slightest increase in this constant, however, results in

a constant acceleration of universe expansion. This supports the notion that the constant has

a mere accounting function; this quantity is extremely sensitive and its balance comes from

the Big Bang’s primordial stages. By contrast, Quintessence is not as sensitive and allows for

an expansion balance. Unlike the Cosmological Constant’s static nature, Quintessence is a

dynamic variable. It interacts with matter and evolves throughout time. In this way it can

interact naturally to adjust to the values actually observed today. This repulsive energy is said

to be scattered in amounts that are too small and uniform to be detected by the instruments

presently available.

Expansion acceleration implied by Quintessence also allows us to explain the discrepancy

between the age of the observed universe – approximately 12 billion light years – and the age

of some stars in our galaxy, which appear to be about 15 billion light years old. Quintessence

is described as having been inactive during the first inflation stages after the Big Bang, and

having later become increasingly important and strong. All these coincidences raise some

doubts. Similarly to the Cosmological Constant, Quintessence may also have been introduced

for purely accounting reasons.

The force of absence of the elsewhere in the Whole-Null Cosmos model


Within the twelve-dimensional Cosmos considered as Whole-Null, all the forces partially

cancel each other, and subsequently all of them cancel each other totally. The Whole and the

Null identity implies in itself a perfect balance between cosmos forces, the aggregate of which

results in the Null. This identity entails that the cosmic forces, in addition to normal visible

communication, also communicate with each other at a level where there are no limits of time

and light. Only in this case can the wholeness of the Whole simultaneously aggregate as

nullity of the Null. This also means that in any light-time ambience of the Cosmos all the rest

of the Cosmos also acts in the presence, invisibly. This requires readers to free themselves of

concepts of limits linked to the visible world. The force of absence of light, present elsewhere

and hidden, but active in the ten dimensions wound here, is free of the limits of light speed;

the force of absence of time, present elsewhere and hidden, but active in the ten dimensions

wound here, is free of the limits of time.

47

A comparison can now be performed between this framework and the traditional Standard

Cosmology Model framework. This latter envisages the presence of dark matter in our

cosmological horizon. Within the Whole-Null Cosmos model, instead, matter which is

elsewhere, beyond the cosmological horizon (galaxies, interstellar gas…), acts invisibly,

everywhere in our cosmological horizon, with its force of absence, free from space-time or

matter-energy constraints. Passing from the Standard Cosmology Model to the one added of

Quintessence, A comparison is done between Quintessence and the Whole-Null Cosmos

model. Quintessence views dark energy in our cosmological horizon, in the form of repulsive

gravitational field. The Whole-Null Cosmos model interprets this invisible force as a

manifestation here of the visible forces of other cosmological horizons. In other words, time-

light present and visible in each of the five other cosmological horizons manifests itself

simultaneously in the form of absence in the observer’s cosmological horizon. This

manifestation is free of time-light limitations. Quintessence explains the invisibility of dark

energy, seeing this energy as uniformly distributed in our cosmological horizon, in such low

concentrations as to remain hidden.

In Escher’s drawing reproduced below, the black birds of day on the left become dark air on

the right, i.e. absence of dark birds at night. At the same time, the white birds in the darkness

of night on the right become clear air on the left side of the drawing, or absence of white birds

in daylight. Similarly, particles present in a cosmological horizon with its time and light

dimensions become absence of particles in each of the cosmological horizons absent from the

one considered. Within the String Theory, the invisible force here called absence takes the

form of invisible wound spatial dimensions of particles. By contrast, within the Whole-Null

Cosmos model, the absence takes the form of invisible wound time and light dimensions of

particles.

48

Day and night; Escher, Maurits Cornelis (1898-1972)

The Whole-Null Cosmos model we are examining implies two differences to the Big Bang

Standard Cosmology Model, with or without Quintessence: 1) The planets move away from

each other only apparently for the observer, and are in fact static. This involves some

rethinking of the idea based on an initial Big Bang, according to which the universe’s

infiniteness expands from the Null. The Whole-Null model instead entails a Null which is

always already Whole, before the immediately and at every instant of eternity of the finite

Cosmos, composed of an infinite number of infinite universes, with six cosmological horizons,

to return to the starting point; 2) The stars’ actual static nature imposes to reconsider the

concept of dark matter: according to the Standard Cosmological Model, requires to measure it

to assess whether it is insufficient and therefore allows for the endless expansion of the

universe, or whether it is too much, leading to the Big Crunch till annihilation, or whether it is

exactly balancing of visible matter, resulting in a lasting balance of a certain amount of

expansion. Quintessence adds the concept of dark energy. In both frameworks, too many

coincidences are required to explain the present conformation of the universe. Within the

Whole-Null Cosmos model, the Cosmos is in itself necessarily balanced, being simultaneously

wholeness of the Whole and nullity of the Null.

Localization of the force of absence of the elsewhere


The String Theory interprets the wound dimensions as space. Such dimensions tend to be

viewed as a fixed quantity. The Whole-Null Cosmos model renames the wound dimensions of

the String Theory as a mathematical representation of the manifestation of the force of

absence of other cosmological horizons’ time and light. The force of absence is free of the

limitations of the time and light dimensions. As such, it manifests itself differently according to

which aggregates are being observed. If the empirical observation focuses on a particle, all

the rest of the cosmos manifests itself as force of absence in that particle, resulting in that

particle’s behaving differently from the same particle observed together with other particles in

an aggregate of a certain number of atoms. In this aggregate, in fact, atoms which were

previously considered as absence and manifested themselves as absent in the single particle,

now manifest themselves as present to the empirical observation. The force of absence on the

single particle is now different. The mathematical representation of the force of absence in the

time and light dimensions wound around themselves varies in this case according to which

aggregate is being observed. This interpretation explains the fact that the more scientific

empirical observations focus on single particles, the less predictable is the behavior of those

particles, and the more likely to presents events of creation and annihilation of particles.

The motion of matter in the present time-light, i.e. within the cosmological horizon, is partly

due to the manifestation of the force of absence of the events present in the other

cosmological horizons beyond our cosmological horizon. This force of absence (different

49

concept compared to dark matter and dark energy), combined with the presence of matter-

energy in the present time-light, determines the motion of the stars, planet systems and

galaxies. The discussion can now reconsider in this perspective the empirical observations

within our cosmological horizon.


IV COSMOS CONFORMATION

Incurvature in the null (go to Table of Contents)

The whole-null paradox model envisages a stationary cosmos, similar to the one proposed by

Einstein, but featuring five more cosmological horizons in addition to the one visible to us.

Scientific observations explained as bodies retreating from each other can be reinterpreted as

indicators of a virtual expansion to the null. The expansion is described as virtual because

matter-energy in space-time decompress from the point of view of the observer, going towards

the horizon. However, if the observer could land on the horizon, upon “Horizon Land” he/she

would find that this expansion has shrunk as if it had never occurred. In this perspective, as

the interval of remoteness (parallel to distance in three-dimensional space) increases, stars

become less compressed; they expand like a distant mirage.

According to the Standard model concept of expansion, the universe is like a loaf of bread

with grapes inside it. The grapes represent galaxies, and the bread is cosmic space. With

baking, the bread’s leavening increases the distance between the grapes, but the size of the

grapes themselves remains unchanged. Conversely, if expansion is seen as an apparent

effect, then it is more appropriate to describe it as a loaf of white bread with small pellets of

brown bread inside it, representing the galaxies. In this case, leavening increases the

distance between the pellets, but the pellets themselves also expand at the same pace. In

terms of String Theory adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, a hidden pair of time-light

dimensions unwinds. If seen from a distance, they look like supplementary matter-energy and

space-time with respect to that locally perceived by the observer. From his view point in fact,

the observer can only see within his own time-light. The string theory forsees wound

dimensions perceived as matter-energy. This would be the case of the four pairs of time-light

dimensions remaining wound and invisible. The pair of unwound time-light dimensions in the

distance would instead be perceive as space-time increase as well as matter-energy increase.

For the remote stars, the flowing of time and intensity of light, perceived by the observer,

decrease because the observer’s own time-light dimensions wind with the distance around

themselves. This effect is apparent for the observer, but corrects itself on site. This

appearance affects the perception of matter-energy. From afar, for the observer on Earth, the

micro distance between the elements constituting matter-energy in the space-time of events

increases. The distance between nucleus and electrons increases. The distance between

particles increases. The distance between the elements composing the particles increases.

50

This said, the perception by the observer of an increased interval between galaxies can be

subdivided into four phenomena: one effect normally due to distance, and three effects due to

decompression caused by the incurvature into the null. These four effects grow in parallel with

the distance from the observation point, the Earth in our case.

1) The stars’ apparent size decreases because of the distance effect. Just like an

automobile’s apparent size shrinks as it moves away from the observer, so it is for galaxies.

The space-time experienced locally by the observer winds with the dinstance from the

observing point.

2) The stars’ apparent size increases due to the effect of the incurvature in the null. In terms

of String Theory adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, it is the unwinding of a pair of

time-light dimensions, experienced as increased matter-energy and space-time. This effect

contrasts the one discussed above. The more remote stars, therefore, appear to be relatively

larger. A galaxy close to the horizon, locally as large as one near us, appear to be relatively

larger than the latter.

3) The stars’ brightness decreases. On the Earth, lights retreating in the distance become

dimmer because the atmosphere absorbs and disperses luminous radiation. Cosmic space is

free of such dispersions. The beams’ trajectory varies following the incurvature in space-time,

but their intensity should remain constant until the radiation is absorbed by some matter. The

decompression of events from expansion to the null decreases the energy emitted per

apparent volume unit. Light energy itself is thinned out with the decompression of matter. This

causes an apparent effect similar to dispersion in the Earth’s atmosphere, but having different

physical origins. In terms of String Theory adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, the light

dimension experienced by the observer winds as the distance of the observed events

increases, therefore diminishing light intensity.

4) Light shifts towards red in the spectrum because of the decompression caused by the

incurvature in the Null, rather than expansion in a curved, only apparently flat cosmos. The

decompressionof events, and of all their components down to the fundamentals, produces a

lengthening of the cosmic radiation waves. This results in a shifting towards red in the

spectrum. In the case of remote stars an increase in radiation spectrum is also found; all

types of radiation tend to be emitted. In terms of String Theory adjusted to the Whole-Null

Cosmos model, an adjacent pair of time-light dimensions unwinds and from the observation

point it is perceived as supplementary matter-energy.

A thought may consider a very long line of automobiles, on the Earth, in a moonlit night. The

observer can get into the one right next to him, while the distant cars appear to be very small.

If their distance were ignored, one would believe it impossible to get into such tiny cars. Only

ants could. The shrinking effect of a more and more distant car is apparent, as is the dimming

of its headlights. Once the observer goes near that car, it goes back to its normal size, and

where it seemed only ants could fit, people can now easily fit. Observers on Earth have been

able to experience this effect, therefore they have elements to interpret a small known object

51

as distant. Humans have only traveled as far as the moon, so they lack the experience to

interpret the relative sizes of stars observable from the Earth. The four effects described

above are due to the incurvature of the cosmos in the null. They are actual, but relative to the

observer. They are apparent in that if the observer takes a spaceship and reaches these

remote stars, as he approaches, the incurvature will bring back the stars and cosmic spaces

to the density characteristics the observer is used to on Earth. In terms of String Theory

adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, the Null incurvature is composed of the six pairs of

time-light dimensions manifest as a visible time-light horizon describable by Riemann’s four-

(sub)dimensional hypersphere, where three dimensions are spatial and one is temporal.

Null incurvature - congruence with observations


In June 1998, the astronomer Michael Disney, professor at the University of Whales in Cardiff,

U.K., who has been a member of the European Space Agency’s Telescope Faint Object

Camera team for two decades, signed an article in “Scientific American” magazine concerning

the study of quasars situated at the extremes of the observed universe. His team installed a

special camera on the Hubble orbiting space telescope, to observe faint radiation. The space

telescope is now orbiting around the Earth. The camera built to detect objects radiating faint

cosmic waves showed some defects in the construction of the lens. The defective lenses were

replaced when the satellite was already orbiting. To perform the replacement, the instruments

to detect faint radiation had to be removed. The observations had to be continued using the

Wide-Field Planetary Camera, which is inadequate for this purpose. Looking at these images

is like peering into the headlights of an approaching car during a snow storm, trying to identify

the manufacturer’s brand. Astronomers play with these images in their computers to try to

eliminate interfering radiation. The results mostly allow us to identify sufficient details, which

outline a galactic structure.

In the article, Michael Disney asks and answers four questions, reproduced below.

Subsequently, alternative answers to the same questions will be provided , congruently with

the Whole-Null Paradox model. For the sake of simplicity, Michael Disney’s observations and

interpretations are given first, after the question, and are written in blue. Immediately

afterwards, Michael Disney’s questions and answers are reconsidered within the framework of

the model expounded in this paper: the cosmos incurvature in the Null increases the stars’

relative size as greater distances from the observer are examined. The observations focus

especially on numerous quasars.

1) How are quasars related to galaxies and stars?

34 quasars have been observed. 75% show a faint and hazy aura interpreted as host

galaxy. The rest has no aura, but the quasars’ brightness might block out the background

image. About half of the host galaxies are elliptic, and about half of them are spiral. The

brightest quasars were elliptic galaxies. Very strangely, about 3/4 of the host galaxies

52

appear to be in collision with other galaxies. Or they seem to incorporate them. The

remaining quarter however may hide very faint galaxies which remain dark. The Whole-

Null Cosmos model interprets these images as images of planets and satellites or planets

and suns in mutual orbs, rather than galaxies. Their remoteness from us causes them to

move more slowly. Their orbs keep them close and make them seem to be in collision with

one another.

Many observed quasars have a brightness that vary instantly: some multiply their intensity

ten times in a few days. No mass can brighten and darken in a shorter time than it takes

light to travel through the mass. Consequently, these masses have a diameter of

approximately one light-week or little more. Therefore, according to astrophysical

standards, quasars appear to be small. One light week equals 300,000 km/s by 604,800

seconds, or about 181 billion kilometers.

According to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, this observation is entirely plausible, but it

would concern ordinary star and galaxy formations, become much brighter due to apparent

expansion as a result of cosmos curvature. Thus, limited distances can be explained as

planetary distances expanded by virtual expansion to null.

Observations show quasars as the brightest objects in the universe. They radiate a large

amount of energy, equal to hundreds of times the radiation of a giant galaxy like our Milky

Way. And the Milky Way has the brightness of 10 billion suns. Unlike the suns and

galaxies, a quasar radiates all energies, from gamma rays to radio rays. Radio emissions,

which first allowed for the identification of quasars, are the smallest source of radiation

they emit. This is why some astronomers have suggested that the definition “quasar”

should be replaced with QSO (quasistellar object).

According to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, this observation is explained by the apparent

nuclear fission due to the apparent expansion of stars, which increases as their distance

from the observer increases. It is a pair of time-light dimensions wound near the observer,

but unwound back there, which are, however, perceived as supplementary matter-energy

because they are different from the time-light dimensions experienced by the observer.

Atom bombs have shown how much energy matter can release. This occurs according to

Einstein’s formula E=mc2. The apparent space between electrons and nuclei, and between

particles in general, apparently increases from our point of view. It becomes like an

enormous explosion of nuclear fission. But it is only virtual and therefore static, confined.

Back in the mid-80s, a number of scientists reported that galaxies in space regions seem

to agglomerate together in “filaments”, “sheets” or “bubbles” separated by huge empty

spaces. This contradicts the Big Bang’s uniform spreading. According to the traditional Big

Bang theory, at this time matter should be a mass uniformly distributed in space, in

contrast to the recent observation of full and empty spaces at great distances. The current

inflationary theory has suggested a device to explain the lack of uniformity in the distances

towards the cosmological horizon. In 1989 a team led by John P. Huchra and Margaret J.

53

Geller of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics announced they had found a

great wall of galaxies with diameters of approximately 500 million light years. Another

team, coordinated by Tom Broadhurst of the University of California at Berkeley, reported

that the observations carried out at distances of many billion light years evidence dense

regions of galaxies alternating with comparatively empty spaces. In addition, whenever

astronomers have been able to expand the scale of observation into the remote spaces of

the observed universe, the size of the largest ordered structures increased in parallel.

According to the Whole-Null Cosmos, these observations contradict the Big Bang as a

totaling cosmological theory, and confirm a symmetric and static Cosmos apparently

expanding towards the observable distances, in which the structures are of comparable

size everywhere in the Cosmos. These structures, however, appear to become larger due

to the incurvature of the null, in the form of decompression caused by unwinding of a pair

of time-light dimensions, perceived as matter-energy and space-time increase.

2) How long does each quasar radiate its enormous energy?

In the immediate cosmic vicinities, within about 1/12 of the distance from Earth to the

observable horizon, i.e. within one billion light years from the Earth, a single quasar is

found for every million galaxies. Rather than prove their rarity compared to galaxies, this

could be interpreted as quasars having a very short life span than galaxies.

Within the Whole-Null Cosmos model, this observation can be explained by the fact that in

the vicinity quasars are actually such, whereas in the distances, ordinary stars virtually

expanded by the cosmos incurvature appear as quasars, and therefore the number of

quasars seems to by higher in the distances.

3) Why were quasars more numerous in the past?

At a distance equal to a 200% radiation shift towards red, approximately 10 billion light

years away from us, or approximately 10/12 of the distance from the horizon, quasars are

1,000 times as many.

The images suggest that the collision of galaxies provides fuel for the production of

radiation by quasars. In other words, the super-fast matter fallen into the black hole

releases radiation due to speed and implosion. This, Michael Disney explains, is

consistent with the Big Bang. At the beginning matter was distributed, therefore it was

impossible for galaxies to collide. Even if black holes had already existed, there would

have been no mechanism to allow for the agglomeration of matter around them. During

the two astronomical eras that followed, of a billion years each, galaxies started to form

and to collide, producing the large number of quasars observed. Lastly, the expansion of

the universe drives galaxies away from each other, reducing the number of galaxy

collisions, and consequently also the number of quasars.

This multiplication of quasars by a factor of 1,000 may be interpreted, within the Whole-

Null Cosmos model, as due to the fact that, at that distance, all planets become visible,

and stars become much brighter, because what is seen is radiation from their pair of time-

54

light dimensions unwound there in the form of added matter-energy, as the observer lies in

another pair of time-light dimensions. From his/her point of view, the faraway unwound

light-time dimensions are supplementary perceived virtual matter-energy and space-time

with respect to the effective matter-energy and space-time experienced locally by the

observer. The string theory forsees wound dimensions perceived as matter-energy. This

would be the case of the four pairs of time-light dimensions remaining wound and invisible.

The pair of unwound time-light dimensions in the distance would instead be perceive as

space-time increase as well as matter-energy increase.

4) How do quasars radiate their prodigious energy?

The answer implies the presence of enormous black holes which attract the surrounding

matter at speeds close to the speed of light. This speed causes matter to emit extremely

strong radiation which explains this brightness.

The whole-null paradox model supports the view of very high energy as an apparent effect

due to incurvature in the null, which unwinds a pair of time-light dimensions seen by the

observer as matter-energy and space-time increase, because the observer lives in another

pair of time-light dimensions, from which the faraway unwound pair of time-light is

perceived as supplementary matter-energy and space-time. And from which the other

remaining four pairs of time-light dimensions continue to be perceived as matter-energy,

identically to how they are perceived locally by the observer. As to black holes, the

discourse has previously argued in favor of the String Theory’s prediction of zero-mass

black holes as inter-galactic corridors, where a pair of time-light dimensions hidden to

observers on the Earth totally unwind locally.These are as such perceived from afar

likewise the universe horizon. This situation can be described by a pair of unwound time-

light dimensions in the form of invisible virtual infinite concentration of matter-energy and

invisible virtual infinite curvature of space-time. Infact, such a limit situation is the passage

from the pair of time-light dimensions adiacent to the observer to the next pair of time-light

dimensions, which remain invisible to the observer.

This said, quasars can then be thought of (according to the Whole-Null Cosmos model) as an

incorrect interpretation of ordinary stars distorted by this incurvature. The stars spread the

energy they emit on an apparently wider area. The atomic interaction distances of remote

planets are magnified by the cosmos incurvature, and atomic interactions, invisible to us,

become visible. Dark planets become bright in the distance, as the energy of atom

interactions becomes visible. It is a virtual nuclear, static fission. Ordinary nuclear fission

drives subatomic elements away from each other, whereas virtual nuclear fission apparent in

the visible distances of the Cosmo is static because the subatomic components remain in

place. A static photograph of an exploding planet would look like the images of these planets.

This radiation should be comparable to that of nuclear bombs. In light of these premises, the

discussion proceeds to reconsider the observations described above.

55

Incurvature in space-time and cosmos incurvature


According to the model, cosmos incurvature in space-time is 60 temporal degrees (or light

degrees) at the horizon. This is a curvature in space-time, or to be more accurate in light-time,

rather than in the cosmos. Considering the cosmos as null, as the model does, there should

be a total curvature rather than one limited to 60° at the horizon. The total curvature of the six

horizons is a full 360°, and each universe has opposite time-light dimensions to another

universe, rotated 180° to it, with its dimensions wound around themselves for the opposite

universe. In the whole-null paradox, the two curvatures coexist.In addition to space-time, we

also consider matter-energy is considered (interpreted according to String Theory as a result

of hidden light and time dimensions). Once all these elements are included, cosmos curvature

becomes whole and annihilated in the null. It is a total curvature in the null.

Absence of a matter-energy center in space-time


The diagrams in the previous pages seem to indicate a single cosmos center, around which it

can be rotated. It should be remembered, however, that the diagram represents a four-

dimensional cosmos using a three-dimensional diagram, with one of the three space

dimensions left out. From here we proceed to visualize the real cosmos with four dimensions,

three-space and one-time, or rather two dimensions, one-light and one-time. It can be looked

at in every direction: up, down, laterally. On the Earth, its galaxy can be considered as a

reference point to determine the Earth’s up and down. The cosmos is the whole, therefore the

observer is unable to take other events as references to determine the up and down, right and

left. Ifthe observer looks at the sky, there is no down. According to the model, taken any

direction, the observer will go straight on indefinitely, and in the end he/she will go back to the

starting point, whichever direction wasinitially taken. The observer will travel straight ahead

(without considering any course deviations due to the stars passed by) in the three space

dimensions, and the direction of time flows. Meanwhile, the observer will turn in the four

dimensions around a cylinder with a radius of 12,225,000,000 light years (between 10 and 15

billion light years). This cylinder returns onto itself to form a cylindrical ring, whose hole is null.

Instead of the hole there is the starting point, i.e. the planet or asteroid from which the

observer took off. The visualization may work out by imagining that while the observer travels

in the cosmos on the cylindrical ring surface, there is always a cylindrical ring centered on the

observer. In this case the cylindrical ring spins around itself (see figure below). Instead of

there being an observer traveling forward, the entire cosmos goes backwards. The reader is

referred to the paragraph (“The observer in the cosmos and his observed universe”) in which

the cosmos is described as split between observer and universe observed by the observer, in

a single cosmos. In this perspective, the observer constitutes half of the cosmos, as himself

plus the rest of the cosmos results in the null. Once “digested” this notion, counterintuitive to

56

the observer’s daily experience, it may prove less strange to think of the universe spinning

towards the observer, when he/she travels in it, rather than he/she moving in a direction within

it. The cylindrical ring can be rotated so that the central axis always corresponds to the

direction taken. The cylindrical ring will position itself so that the direction taken is tangent to

all other circumferences of the cylindrical ring, in its center (see figure). Each direction taken

has its cylindrical ring to visualize movement. Each of the infinite directions has a

corresponding cylindrical ring. This description shows clearly how greater distances, from the

observer’s point of view, recombine when the observer goes towards them.

57

In a different frame of thought, a start can lie on the inaccurate and fictitious image of the

cosmos as a cube, just to select a geometric volume. Let us consider a human observer on

the cube’s surface, at the center of one of the sides. This observer moves within the interior of

the cube, at a right-angle to the plane from where he/she start moving, towards the opposite

face and in parallel to the four lateral faces. When the observer reaches the other side of the

cube he is back to his original starting point, and at the same time he/she is at the end. But

this example is inaccurate as to the shape of the volume, which is better represented by the

cylindrical ring, called torus. Anyway, moving from the center of our observed universe and

heading forward, we will intersect six radiuses of observed universe, or six distances from

observer to horizon, and find ourselves back at the starting point, whichever rectilinear

direction has been taken.

58

To visualize this concept better, a re-shaping can be made by taking the six circles of events

horizon fitting in the three dimensions of the figure shown above, and lay them on a two-

dimensional plane. Note the way in which the circles intersect: starting from the Earth and

reaching the horizon, on our imaginary Horizon Land, the observer is in the center of a new

horizon, and the Earth is now on the horizon. These circles are different from the diagram

related to the entire cosmos curvature. Instead of representing the cosmos, each of them

represents a universe, i.e. a horizon of events. After six horizons of events, the seventh

horizon of events is the same as the one we moved from, as far as space is concerned.

59

If the observer travels in the cosmos in a straight line he/she will go back to our starting point

an infinite number of times, in a different length of time according to the navigation speed.

This is made possible by the incurvature in the null.

The center of the cosmos


Considering the cosmos as whole-null, always already begun and already ended, as null it is

center-less. In it, every event is relative. Each point inside it can be taken as center. The

60

cylindrical ring described above, called torus, with a center diameter equal to zero, suitably

describes this relativity. In parallel, every point on the surface of the Earth can be taken as

center of the surface. By contrast, the Earth’s volume has a well-defined center. This is

possible because, in addition to the surface, the matter on which the surface is based is also

considered.

In the cosmos there is an infinite number of matter-energy and space-time universes, or five

pairs of hidden one pair of visible time-light dimensions. This infiniteness also means

relativity. Each universe can be taken as the central one, and each universe is relative to the

observer examining it. Therefore, each observer observes from the center of the cosmos.

There is an infinite number of these relative centers.

Infinite past from beyond the horizon and infinite future beyond the horizon


The cosmos curvature in the null with return onto itself, as described in the paragraphs above,

illustrates the relativity of horizons in relation to the observer, and the physical forces that

travel in the cosmos go through the horizons. A thought can be done on the way the Earth is

affected by the past from Horizon Land on the horizon of events. Imagination can consider the

pasts arriving to the observer along a specific directional axis in the cosmos. The observer

can investigate into the telescope in that direction, and imagine which further pasts there

might be beyond the horizon, always in the same direction. The imagination reaches Horizon

Land; keeping to look in the same direction the new horizon can be perceived; and be called

Second Horizon. This Horizon Land is influenced by the past of a Second Horizon Star;

continuing along the direction the Third Horizon can be perceived. The past of the Star on the

Third Horizon influences the Second Horizon Star. The past of Fourth Horizon influences the

Third Horizon Star. The past of Fifth Horizon influences the Fourth Horizon Star. The past of

the Earth on the Sixth Horizon influences the Fifth Horizon Star. It should be kept in mind that

this past of the Earth is different from the Earth in which the observer lives now. It is a very

remote past. And the imagination could continue further, always along the same direction, to

repeat the journey traveled before. However, this tour takes place in a still earlier past. Pasts

precede each other along that direction endlessly. The spiral diagram is a graphical

representation of these pasts:

61

In parallel, considering the future, there is an infinite number of futures. Remember that the

axes ending in a diamond represent the flowing of time. To examine the diagram above in

relation to the past, the observer must view himself/herself as located at the outmost final

point of the spiral and look inside the concentric spiral as past. To examine the diagram in

relation to the future, the observer must view himself/herself as located at the center of the

spiral. In this case the spiral expanding outwards represents the future. A basic difference

between past and future should be pointed out: the past is unique, in that each story has a

definite, unchangeable past which has already occurred, while the future is a possible future,

and should more accurately be referred to in the plural. There are always infinite futures for

any given present.

Three types of cosmic spirit; one is force of dark matter and energy7

(vai a sommario)

The 5 hidden light dimensions and 5 hidden time dimensions can be considered in the

past-becoming-present as well as in the simultaneousness of the present, as well as in the

future. The above discussion just described how the spiral represents the infinite number of

hidden dimensions in the past, for that specific event. The same spiral, in the opposite

direction, represents the infinite number of hidden dimensions in that specific event’s future.

These situations of the cosmos are absent to the observer, and as such they are cosmic spirit.

The past is past cosmic spirit. The future is future cosmic spirit. These refer to a specific

event. The simultaneous events to a given one (as discussed above), are absent to it.

7 This paragraph has been reviewed on 15 September 2001

62

Simultaneous events are therefore cosmic spirit, in the sense of absent events. This is the

third type of cosmic spirit. The first type of cosmic spirit is the past of the considered event.

This past makes itself present to the observer as his/her past and as such is completely

integrated in the visible presence of the event. Empirical observations can be performed on its

manifestation in the presence. The second type of cosmic spirit is the future and this has

infinite possibilities determined by the consequences of the present presence, of the event

considered, and in combination with the future consequences of other events. This absence

has has force in the sense that its possibilities are infinite but limited. Certain futures are

impossible to happen. This infinite partiality of the Whole-Null Cosmos is manifest in the

presence in that the presence determines which infinite futures are possibles and which

infinite futures are impossibles. The infinite events that are simultaneous to the present one

considered are absent and have no direct influence on the presence. They act on the future of

other events instead than on the simultaneousness. In the Whole-Null Cosmos model, all the

forces have to interact in order to annulle the wholeness of the whole in the nullity the null.

The simultaneous events must therefore act invisibly on the presence. This simultaneousness

is the parallel concept to dark matter and dark enegy discussed in the Standard Cosmological

Theory. This force is called force of absence and manifests itself invisibly in the events.After

these remarks the discussion can go back to dark matter and dark energy (discussed in this

model as force of absence), to consider whether an exact amount of them can be determined.

An assessment of the amount of dark matter


In the paragraphs above, in discussing dark matter, it was noted that according to current

estimates, dark matter is approximately nine times as much as visible matter. Within the

Whole-Null Cosmos model previously described, considering the simultaneousness of events

as illustrated above, the fives simultaneous cosmological horizons hidden by the hidden

dimensions constitute dark matter. This element explains the motion of planets and galaxies

in our cosmological horizon. This dark matter is five times as much as matter in our

cosmological horizon, because there are five hidden cosmological horizons. This estimate

differs from the current estimate of dark matter, amounting to approximately nine times the

amount of known matter. In order to explain this difference the interpretation of cosmological

observations must be considered within the Whole-Null Cosmos model. The incurvatures

identified by this model evidence how even ordinary dark planets become bright as their

distance from the observer increases. This virtual, static nuclear fission effect releases

radiation on all radiation spectrums. As stated before, dark planets become bright if they are

far enough from the observer. Standard Cosmology Theory views these bright remote stars as

suns rather than planets. For each sun an average number of planets is estimated in terms of

this interpretation. The Standard Cosmology Model leads to an overestimate of matter present

in the universe (our cosmological horizon). This larger amount of matter also implies the need

63

for a larger amount of dark matter and dark energy to account for the dynamic balances

calculated by this theory. This would explain the estimate of nine times the amount of visible

matter, rather than five times, as measured on the basis of the Whole-Null Cosmos model.

This greater amount of matter interpreted at a distance from us implies different balances in

the positions of planets and galaxies. By contrast, in the Whole-Null model interpretation,

matter is distributed differently, and therefore an amount of dark matter five times greater than

is found in our cosmological horizon can be consistent. Considering the fact that in whatever

direction the observers moves he/she may reach a new cosmological horizon, the discourse

can be led to conceive of a multiplicity of cosmological horizons, more than five. However, as

discussed above, past another cosmological horizon, there again the movement can head in

countless directions towards more cosmological horizons. For any assumed position in the

cosmos any direction can be taken. On each of them there are six subsequent cosmological

horizons. The seventh horizon is the initial one, but in another time.

The incurvature of the cosmos in the null decompresses the cosmos to null. This apparent

expansion recomposes itself locally. This is why, if the observer were to travel to remote

recesses of the cosmos, he/she would find the same densities of matter experienced locally

on the Earth. The diagrams above show the concentric circles applicable for a static observer

looking around him/her towards the outmost cosmological horizon,. The intersected, same-

sized circles represent the situation of each cosmological horizon locally, for actual life

conditions existing locally.

The cosmos is contained in itself like Chinese boxes


With a four-dimentional cosmic hypersphere, traveling in a straigth line in one direction will

take the traveler back to the earth after approximately 77 billion light years, or six horizon

lengths away. This acting can be imagined in any chosen direction from Earth: at an interval

of approximately 77 billion light years, or six cosmic horizon lengths away, the traveler will be

find the Earth again. This means that the observer on Earth is surrounded by the Earth itself,

turned inside out like a glove, just like in a Riemann’s hypersphere. But, after the rectilinear

cosmic journey, when the traveler reaches the Earth again, he/she will find it unchanged from

64

the way it is now, except for any transformations due to the stars’ normal life cycle (e.g., the

Earth has died collapsing onto the Sun). The Earth, as shell of the observer, is external in that

it becomes past, absent, in relation to the present Earth. This is consistent both with

Riemann’s hypersphere and with the Cosmos as Whole-Null. In terms of String Theory

adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, the five pairs of time-light dimensions of the

elsewhere beyond the horizon are, to the observer, invisible cosmic spirit, in that they

manifest themselves in his/her cosmic horizon as force of absence of present events in the

other cosmic horizons.

How the infinite universes beyond the horizon act in our own universe


The infinite universes beyond the cosmic horizon, i.e. beyond our own universe, are absent to

the observer within his/her same Cosmos. No matter-energy in the space-time of these

universes reaches the observer as presence. However, these universes of the same

conformation as the Cosmos are absence of matter-energy and absence of space-time for our

universe, and manifest themselves to the observer as such, i.e. absent. In other words, they

manifest themselves as cosmic spirit, as force of absence. What this means is that actually,

for the observer, nothing is beyond the horizon, because the infinite universes of the Cosmos

conformation beyond the horizon manifest themselves totally in the present of the observer’s

cosmic horizon as cosmic spirit (force of absence). But if the observer moves in the cosmos,

his universe moves as well, just like the horizon moves for a traveler on Earth. The universe,

as cosmic horizon, moves. In the direction the observer is moving along, the matter-energy in

space-time, which was previously absent beyond the cosmic horizon and manifested itself in

presence as force of absence, gradually becomes present, i.e. detectable by the observer’s

measuring instruments. Conversely, in the direction from which the observer is moving away,

the cosmic horizon follows the traveling observer and progressively hides previously present

matter-energy in space-time. This presence becomes progressively absent, turning into force

of absence acting in the observer’s cosmic horizon in the form of cosmic spirit.

Eleven-dimensions theory as a description of the observed universe


Having described the twelve dimensions of the cosmos, the observer can now be considered.

This enables to choose how many dimensions to remove from the total twelve, to have a

universe theory rather than a cosmos theory. An observer observing his own universe lives in

its time dimension, and receives information from the outside through the light dimension

visibile in his universe. The ancients only considered the three spatial dimensions. Time was

ignored, as it was so deeply inscribed in each person’s everyday experience as to be taken

for granted. The time of static events surrounding the observers flows at the same speed as

the observer’s. This is why time was overlooked, this is why the approximation of space

without time can be overlooked without any problems for mutually stationary events. This

65

being said, it is necessary to remove one time dimension, that of the observer, in order to

conceive of a sensible theory of the universe. The adequate theory to describe the observed

universe has therefore eleven dimensions, as the M-theory or the Supersimmetry.

Else, the light dimension can be examined in this perspective. Two observers stationary and

near to each other live in an almost equal light dimension. This dimension is also almost equal

for all the other stationary nearby events. Nevertheless, each observer, even if extremely near

to another, has his/her own experiences and therefore his/her specific and unique observed

universe. The light cone of the events past has focused on a specific genetic code, in a

specific time, with a specific experience, with a specific limited set of infinite possible futures.

Pursuing this reasoning, two twins grow up differentiating their characters. The light

dimension singles out each observer’s observed universe. The light dimension can therefore

be considered as always different, even if infinitesimally for mutually near events. If both the

time dimension and the light dimension were considered as unnoticed by the observer, an

adequate string theory should be composed of ten dimensions, twelve less the two considered

as intrinsically lived and unseen by the observing scientist. However, such a theory would be

an approximation, differently from an eleven dimensions theory, which without approximations

adequately describes the observed universe.

Big Bang Theory as a description of the observer


Following the arguments above, the dimensions can be reconsidered in the Big Bang theory.

This theory is based on the dimensions the observer observes directly: the three spatial

dimensions identified since the ancient times, and the time dimension, evidenced by

Einstein’s General Relativity. In the perspective of the arguments set forth above, spatial

dimensions are three sub-dimensions resulting from the interaction between light and time

dimensions. Therefore, it should be also possible to express Einstein’s General Relativity in

two dimensions. The information arrives to the observer from the Cosmos across the

Observed Universe through time light. The observing scientist is made up of the historical

sequence of all his past moments. This body evolves also through contact with other bodies,

for example in eating. The interaction between the food and the observer’s body occurs at

light speed on parallel time cycles. Both body particles and food particles evolve throughout

the same time. This cycle also coincides with light cycle bringing information. In this case time

is still, taken for granted. All the information which is forced to travel through the vacuum of

matter to reach us only do so at the speed of light. In addition, there are events in matter

whose speed are negligible compared to light, such as sound which enables to interact using

the voice. In short, the observing scientist is the history of his universe. That person is the

way he is, rather than otherwise, because he had those particular life experiences, parents,

nationality, training, climate, gravity, past geological eras and glaciations, sun, neighboring

planets, galaxy, etc. For another observer, close to the one just described, the universe if

66

virtually identical in the past, but varies because of the differences in his near past. The sun,

planets, and galaxy are the same, but his place of origin, forefathers’ culture, youth

experiences, inherited genetic code and so on may be different. As observers on the Earth are

very close as to experiences in time and light, their remote pasts are almost identical, which

means that their universes are almost identical. In this perspective, the Big Bang theory

describes the universe which is unique to each observer; it describes the observer’s universe;

it describes his cosmic code (parallel to the genetic code inherited from his parents).

Mutual necessity of the three theories


The equation on the variables within only on of the three theories described in this paper – the

Whole-Null Cosmos Theory; the Eleven-Dimensions M-Theory of the Observed Universe; or

the Big Bang Theory perceived by the universe’s observer – risks having too many variables

compared to the number of solvable equations, which would lead to indeterminateness. The

system of equations composed of the equations of all the three theories should instead allow

for only some of the possible variables and measures. The three theories are mutually

necessary to perform accurate measurements and reliable predictions.

Virtual mirage of initial explosion: virtuality of Big Bang


Following the above discussion, the Big Bang theory can now be reviewed. This theory is

based on assessments of the shifting of light towards red in the spectrum, indicating that the

distance between stars increases. According to most, this increase proves the Big Bang

expansion. Differently from this interpretation, the model here described proposes that the

light’s reddening results from the virtual expansion of matter-energy and space-time towards

the null. The phenomenon’s inner distances remain unchanged locally. In terms of String

Theory adjusted to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, a pair of time-light dimensions unwinds,

virtually increasing the perceived matter-energy and space-time, as the observer lives in

his/her time-light dimension and the faraway unwound time-light adds to the time-light

experienced by the observer. The faraway unwound time-light are seen as supplementary

matter-energy and space-time.

In support of the Big Bang theory, the very faint background heat (radiation) which permeates

the universe is explained as a remainder of the universe’s initial explosion. However,

considering a black hole’s horizon of events, Stephen Hawking has estimated that it anyway

emits some radiation. Thinking then of how the cosmological horizon is itself a horizon of

events, as such it can emit radiations due to the interaction of matter-energy close to that

horizon with the horizon itself. According to the Whole-Null Cosmos model, the cosmos’

background heat could indicate a certain amount of heat energy emitted within the observer’s

cosmological horizon by the cosmological horizon itself, similarly to the radiation emitted by a

black hole.

67

Like the Big Bang theory, Andrei Linde’s theory of a self-reproducing inflationary Universe is

based on an incredibly fast initial expansion.

On the other hand, the whole-null paradox cosmology model implies that the cosmos is

always simultaneously already begun and already ended. The expansion is always already

begun and already ended. In this model the expansion can be seen as occurred more rapidly

than one occurred infinitely fast, i.e. occurred before the immediately. In this way it becomes

limit instance of the expansion envisaged in Andrei Linde’s theory, based on an extremely fast

initial expansion (the paragraphs “Exercises with light cones on the universe horizon” and on

“Examples and notes”-“ Inconsistencies in calculating the age of the universe” (observations

on pulsar B1757-24 (in examples and notes)), report how measures of the age of the universe

according to the Big Bang theory are nowadays questioned by new measures).

The cosmos is, always has been and always will be whole and null at the same time, but

outside time. In it, time is irrelevant. The null is already whole. The whole always already

aggregates in null. And if it were to go back to null, it would already be a whole, un-

aggregated in a wholeness of events.

The Big Bang theory assumes that at the horizon of the observed universe is found a density

of uniform matter due to the primeval mixture of matter-energy. However, observations

conducted in the last two decades in the space-time distances towards the borders of the

horizon of events have shown regions dense with matter, intervalled by vacuum regions, as is

the case closer to us, consistently with the model described in these pages. To account for

these recent observations, various theories have been suggested to combine a uniform inital

explosion with cosmological mechanisms causing this uniformity to be lost almost

immediately. Conversely, the Whole-Null Cosmos model explains these discrepancies with

the absence of an initial explosion, without the need for any especially elaborate theoretical

construction. But the model here discussed is in accordance with the Big Bang, which is

though interpreted as an apparent virtuality of the observer. At this point it can asked

ourselves whether it is more difficult to think of an initial Big Bang, before which there was the

null or something else (the observer view), or whether it is harder to think of the cosmos as

simultaneously wholeness of the whole and nothingness of the null (the cosmos), without a

beginning and without an end, both beginning and end.

Age of the observed universe and age of the cosmos


The age of the universe has been calculated by physicists to be approximately 12 billion

years, or twelve billion light years (estimates range between 10 and 15 billion l.y.). This is

simply the time required for the light to reach the observer from the observable horizon, and

can be interpreted as the age of the images that arrive to the observer. But the cosmos as

null-whole is also ageless. The total curvature of the cosmos over the null makes it timeless.

This is consistent with a horizon of events which behaves like the horizon of events of a black

68

hole, where time stops. The universe’s horizon of events can therefore be described as a

virtual black hole. This cosmological horizon receives radiation from an infinite past; hence,

beyond it there is virtually an infinite mass and a space-time infinitely returning onto itself.

This stops the time flowing at the horizon. In other words, the cosmological horizon of the

observed universe is timeless. BIBLIOGRAPHY


Bibliography Note: The Whole-Null Cosmos model is based on astronomical observations, but

also takes into account philosophy and theology. A thinking may consider how the Big Bang

Theory is closely related to the concepts of creation proposed by secularized religion. In

parallel, many religions also support a view of God as whole-null. This article, however, only

deals with the physical and philosophical-physical aspects of the references indicated in this

bibliography.

Agostini, Franco; Giochi logici e matematici; Arnoldo Mondadori; 1982

Arnheim, Rudolf; Entropia e arte: Saggio sul disordine e l'ordine; Einaudi; Torino 1974

Asimov, Isaac; Domani; Interno Giallo; Milano 1989; ISBN88-356-0007-3

Atkins, Peter W.; Il secondo principio; Zanichelli; Bologna 1988

Attenborough, Richard (a cura di); Le parole di Gandhi. Scelte da Richard Attenborough; TEA;

1989

Barone, Francesco; Bernardini, Carlo; Berti, Enrico; Bodei, Remo; Eco, Umberto; Losurdo,

Domenico; Volpi, Franco; Metafisica. Il mondo nascosto; Gius. Laterza & Figli; Roma-Bari

1997; ISBN 88-420-5146-2

Cantarano, Giuseppe; Immagini del nulla; Bruno Mondadori; Milano 1998

Carse, James P.; Giochi finiti e infiniti: La vita come gioco e come possibilità; Arnoldo

Mondadori; Milano 1986

Cartesio; Discorso sul metodo; Arnoldo Mondadori; Milano 1993; ISBN88-04-37651-1

Casati, Giulio (a cura di); Il caos: Le leggi del disordine; Le Scienze; Milano 1991; ISBN88-

7004-057-7

Craveri, Marcello (a cura di); I Vangeli Apocrifi; Einaudi; Torino 1969 e 1990; ISBN 88-06-

11674-6

69

Credere; in Filosofia e Teologia; Edizioni scientifiche italiane; settembre-dicembre 1997

(concetti di creazione, dunque paralleli al concetto di Big Bang)

Croce, Benedetto; Breviario di estetica; Laterza; Roma-Bari 1958 (concetto di coerenza)

Crossley, John N.; e altri; Che cos'è la logica matematica?; Boringhieri; 1976; ISBN88-33-

0011-8

Davies, Paul C. W.; The New Physics; Cambridge University Press; New York 1989

Davies, Paul; I misteri del tempo: L'universo dopo Einstein; Arnoldo Mondadori Editore;

Milano 1995; ISBN88-04-37443-8

Einstein, Albert; Relatività: Esposizione divulgativa; Universale scientifica Boringhieri; Torino

1967

Einstein, Albert; Teoria dei quanti di luce; Newton Compton tascabili; Roma 1992; ISBN88-

7983-000-7

Falletta, Nicholas; Il libro dei paradossi; Longanesi&C.; Milano 1983; ISBN 88-304-0864-6

Fernando, Anthony; Swidler, Leonard; Introduzione al Buddismo: Paralleli con l’etica ebraico-

cristiana.; EDB Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna; Bologna 1992; ISBN88-10-60408-3

Ferraris, Maurizio; L'ermeneutica;. Laterza & Figli; Roma-Bari 1998; ISBN 88-420-5509-3

Fioni, Ettore (a cura di); Giuliani, Andrea; Materia ed antimateria; in “Le scienze quaderni” n.

49; Le Scienze; settembre 1989

Fromm, Erich; To Have or to Be?; Continuum Pub Group; May 1996; ISBN0826409121

Gaensler, B. M. e Frail, D. A.; A large age for the pulsar B1757-24 from an upper limit on its

proper motion; “Nature 406”, 158-160 (2000)

Gitta Mallasz; Dialoghi con l’angelo; Edizioni Sarva; Imola (BO) 1990; ISBN 88-85220-17-7

(concetti di spirito e dunque paralleli al concetto di spirito cosmico)

Giudici, Maria Pia; Gli Angeli; Città Nuova Editrice; Roma 1989; ISBN 88-311-7215-8 (concetti

di spirito e dunque paralleli al concetto di spirito cosmico)

Givone, Sergio; Storia del nulla; Laterza; Roma-Bari 1998; ISBN 88-420-4617-5

Green, Brian; L’universo elegante. Superstringhe, dimensions nascoste e la ricerca della

teoria ultima.; Einaudi; Torino, 2000; ISBN 88-06-15523-7

70

Grieco, Agnese; Wittegenstein; Il Saggiatore; Milano 1998

Gyatso Tenzin (Dalai Lama); La mia terra. La mia gente.; Sperling & Kupfer; 1998; ISBN88-

200-2666-X (concetto di contemporaneità di tutto e nulla)

Harrison, Harry; Minsky, Marvin; The Turing Option; Warner Books; October 1993;

ISBN0446364967

Hawking, Stephen; Buchi neri e universi neonati: Riflessioni sull'origine e il futuro del cosmo;

Biblioteca Universale Rizzoli; Milano 1995; ISBN88-17-11648-3

Hawking, Stephen; Dal big bang ai buchi neri: Breve storia del tempo; Biblioteca Universale

Rizzoli; Milano 1990; ISBN88-17-11521-5

Henbest, Nigel; Marten, Michael; La nuova astronomia; Hoepli; 2000

Hofstadter, Douglas R.; Gödel, Escher, Bach: un’eterna ghirlanda brillante; Adelphi; Milano

1984

Hofstadter, Douglas; Fluid Concepts & Creative Analogies: Computer Models of the

Fundamental Mechanisms of Thought; Basic Books; March 1996; ISBN0465024750

Keshavjee, Shafique; Il re, il saggio e il buffone; Einaudi; Torino 1998; ISBN 88-0615044-8

(confronti tra fedi religiose diverse)

Krauss, Lawrence M.; Il mistero della massa mancante nell'universo; Cortina Raffaello; 2000

La Bibbia; Edizioni San Paolo; Cinisello Balsamo (MI), 1987; ISBN 88-215-1068-9

La creazione e il nulla; in “Filosofia e Teologia”; Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane; gennaio-aprile

1997

Laurentin, René; Lo Spirito Santo, questo sconosciuto; Queriniana; Brescia 1998; ISBN88-

399-2160-5 (in parallelo con lo spirito cosmico)

Le Scienze CD 1995; Le Scienze; Milano 1995





71


Le Scienze; Caso, probabilità e statistica; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 98; Milano, ottobre 1997

Le Scienze; Il mondo dei quanti; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 70; febbraio 1993

Le Scienze; Insiemi, gruppi, strutture; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 92; Milano, ottobre 1996

“Le Scienze” n. 199; Milano, marzo 1985


“Le Scienze” n. 253; Milano, settembre 1989

“Le Scienze” n. 258; Milano, febbraio 1990


“Le Scienze” n. 273; Milano, maggio 1991

“Le Scienze” n. 278; Milano, 1991

“Le Scienze” n. 281; Milano, gennaio 1992

“Le Scienze” n. 294; Milano, febbraio 1993

“Le Scienze” n. 308; Milano, aprile 1994

“Le Scienze” n. 310; Milano, giugno 1994

“Le Scienze” n. 357; Milano, maggio 1998

Logica; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 60; Le Scienze; Milano, giugno 1991

Lolli, Gabriele; Il riso di Talete: Matematica ed umorismo; Bollati Boringhieri; Torino 1998;

ISBN 88-339-1069-5

Maffei, Paolo; I mostri del cielo: comete, quasars, buchi neri; Arnoldo Mondadori; Milano

1991; ISBN88-04-34315-X

Magnificent Cosmos; in “Scientific American”, quarterly, spring 1998, volume 9, number 1;

spring 1998

Minsky, Marvin L.; Papert, Seymour A.; Perceptrons: Introduction to Computational Geometry;

MIT Press 1988; ISBN0262631113

72

Nascita e morte delle stelle; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 99; Le Scienze; dicembre 1997

Notiziari Online; Le Scienze; in http://www.lescienze.it/

Numeri, caso e sequenze; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 45; Le Scienze; dicembre 1988

Oliverio, Alberto; Alfabeto della mente: Biologia e comportamento; Edizioni Dedalo; Bari 1986

Peroni, Luigi; Padre Pio il san Francesco dei nostri tempi; Edizioni Borla; Roma 1998; ISBN

88-263-1269-9

Porizionato, Giuseppe; Psicobiologia della musica; Pàtron; Bologna 1984

Quasar e buchi neri; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 71; Le Scienze; Milano, aprile 1993

Rucker, Rudy; Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite; Princeton

University Press; 1995; ISBN 0691001723

Russell, Bertrand; I principi della matematica; Newton & Compton; Roma 1989

Russell, Bertrand; L'ABC della Relatività; Longanesi&C.; Milano 1960

Russell, Bertrand; The Problems of Phylosophy; Oxford University Press; Oxford New York

1967; ISBN0-19-888018-9

Schopenhauer, Arthur; Il mondo come volontà e rappresentazione; Laterza; Roma-Bari 2000

(metafisica completa e dunque parallela alla completezza della meta-fisica del tutto-nulla)

Schopenhauer, Arthur; L'arte di ottenere ragione; Adelphi; Milano 1997; ISBN88-459-0856-9

“Scientific American”, april 1998

“Scientific American”, june 1998

“Scienza Nuova”, anno 1, n. 2; Asterios Delithanassis Editore; maggio 1998

Severino, Emanuele; La follia dell’angelo; Rizzoli; Milano 1997; ISBN 88-17-84151-9

Severino, Emanuele; Legge e caso; Adelphi; Milano, giugno 1993; ISBN 88-459-0403-2

Shanet, Howard; Come imparare a leggere la musica; Biblioteca Univesale Rizzoli; 1975;

ISBN88-17-11013-2

Silvestrini, Vittorio; Che cos'è l'entropia: Ordine disordine ed evoluzioni dei sistemi; Editori

Riuniti; Roma 1986; ISBN88-359-2817-6

73

Silvestrini, Vittorio; Guida alla teoria della relatività: Dalle previsioni di Einstein alle conferme

sperimentali; Editori Riuniti; Roma 1992; ISBN88-359-2393-x

Sini, Carlo; Filosofia teoretica; Jaca Book; Milano 1992; ISBN 88-16-43001-X

Sini, Carlo; Metafisica. Appunti delle lezioni del corso di filosofia teoretica II; Cuem; maggio

1997

Spazio, tempo e relatività; in “Le Scienze quaderni” n. 97; Le Scienze; settembre 1997

Steiner, Rudolf; Theosophy: An Introduction to the Supersensible Knowledge of the World and

the Destination of Man; Anthroposophic Press Inc.; Bell’s Pond, Hudson, New York 1971;

ISBN 088010-179-2

Strathern, Paul; I grandi filosofi. Platone, Aristotele, Cartesio, Locke, Hume, Wittgenstein;

Arnoldo Mondadori Editore; Milano 1998; ISBN 88-04-44918-7

Trabattoni, Franco (a cura di); Parmenide: I frammenti; Marcos y Marcos; Milano

Vattimo, Gianni (a cura di); Rovatti, Pier Aldo (a cura di); Il pensiero debole; Feltrinelli; Milano

1990; ISBN 88-07-09001-5

Vattimo, Gianni; Le avventure della differenza; Garzanti; 1980; ISBN 88-11-47490-6

Waldrop, Morris Mitchell; Complessità; Instar Libri; Torino 1996; ISBN88-461-0010-7

Weinberg, Steven; I primi tre minuti: L'affascinante storia dell'origine dell'universo; Arnoldo

Mondadori; Milano 1977

Wheeler, John A.; Gravità e space-time; Zanichelli Editore; Bologna 1993

Wheeler, John Archibald; A Journey into Gravity and Spacetime; Scientific American Library;

New York 1990

Zichichi, Antonio; L'infinito; Editrice Galileo Galilei; Lausanne 1988; ISBN88-7831-000-X

(go to Table of Contents) EXAMPLES AND NOTES Hypothesis of virtuality mirage of cosmic bodies spatial retreat Back to “Flat universes in a curved cosmos” in main document

The incurvation of the cosmos somehow results in the light rays beyond the observable

horizon being unable to reach us.

74

For example, automobiles can be considered. Racing cars can reach speeds in the order of

185 miles per hour. This is the maximum speed they can do today on a racing track. But an

automobile can move away at higher speeds. A thinking can ponder of a Ferrari with the

engine turned off, inside an airplane traveling at five hundred miles per hour. That car shows

a speed of five hundred miles per hour.

The retreat of the unmoving automobile causes it to have an apparent speed, beyond its

possibilities. A thinking can ponder of a snail inside an automobile. The snail moves away at

sixty miles per hour, although its own speed is in the order of a few yards per hour. Its

apparent speed is much greater than its physical abilities.

Thus, if a curved space-time is theorised, the stars might be still, have null reciprocal speeds,

and yet retreat at speeds in the scale of light speed.

The fact that scientists see a universe perceived as flat with planets retreating may suggest

an effect in the empirical observations due to the fourth dimension (time), unobservable to the

observer.

How can this effect be illustrated?

An example will demonstrate how eliminating a dimension from a physical event can show the

same event in a different way.

Imagine a circle of muscular men pulling ropes fastened to a pole on a mound.

All the men weigh the same and are equally strong, but each one pulls a rope of different

length tied at different heights of the pole. At each rope fastening, the pole has a sensor which

measures the strength applied horizontally, ignoring the vertical strength component.

75

The horizontal strength component, right-angled to the pole, will be smaller and smaller as the

rope’s angle with respect to the pole decreases.

As known, two segments of identical length represent two identical forces. However, their

horizontal component is different. Considering only the horizontal component is like removing

one of the three spatial dimensions, and transposing the graph on a plane. The vertical

component is removed by flattening the mound, the pole and the men, making them two-

dimensional.

76

In this way the forces on the pole have different strength, although the men are all at equal

distance from the pole, their strength and weight is the same. And the ropes are seen as

horizontal. An observer can be imagined as positioned in a cavity near the pole, just below the

surface. He/she only sees the pole and the measurements of the horizontal forces on the

pole. Noting that the horizontal forces are different, this observer will logically conclude that

the men’s strengths and weights are different.

Instead, it is the pole which has been diminished of one dimension and pushed down to the

ground. Passing from three to two dimensions distorts the measuring. The observer believes

that the effect is due to different characteristics in the men pulling the rope, rather than to the

height dimension which has been removed.

Removing dimensions may prove deceiving with respect to physical effects - it may create

physical situations which are only apparent. As far as the cosmos is concerned, flattening the

fourth dimension (time) in the empirical observations may lead to wrong interpretations of the

physical events which include such dimension.

In this perspective, a body with spatial co-ordinates half way from the observer’s universe

horizons that is retreating locally at half the speed of light would appear to retreat at the speed

of light. And a body at the observer’s universe horizon spatial co-ordinates retreating locally at

the speed of light would result in a virtual speed at two times the speed of light. This would

correspond to static matter-energy at two distances of the cosmological horizon (this concept

is detailed in the article). In other words, it would correspond to matter-energy beyond the

universe horizon and as such described in the article as force of absence (or cosmic spirit).

Else, a body at the observer’s universe horizon spatial co-ordinates approaching at the speed

of light would appear static to the observer.

(go to Table of Contents) Back to “Flat universes in a curved cosmos” in main document

The democracy of General Relativity Back to “Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness” main document

As known from General Relativity, no observer is privileged. All observers consider their own

point as stationary and all other points as in motion. The following is an extreme example of

two heavenly bodies moving away from each other at the speed of light. From the Earth,

Donald Duck sees Mickey Mouse suspended in his plunge from the rock of Catapulco into

Aladia Bay on Quarkland, which retreats at the speed of light. Sooner or later Mickey should

reach the water. Instead, Donald sees him hanging in the air, as if he were floating

weightlessly. For Donald, Mickey’s time has stopped. Yet, in the meantime Mickey has

plunged into the water, picked up a little Quark sand from the bottom, and emerged to the

77

surface. Then he has spent more days and months and years. He has become old, and looks

at his nephews who resemble him. His image, however, is still fixed for Donald Duck. Inverting

the point of view, Mickey observes the Earth. He sees Donald on the Earth, crossing the

street to run after Hewey, Lewey and Dewey. Strangely, Donald looks frozen in the middle of

taking a long leap, and cars are rushing towards him, but they are also frozen. This occurs

throughout the years to come and for an indefinite time. Donald is now middle-aged and has

settled down selling hot-dogs and repairing scooters. Or rather, he is about to lose his job, but

Uncle Scrooge might assign him on a mission to a remote gold field.

(go to Table of Contents) Back to “Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness” main document

Relativity of time Back to “Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness” in main document

Let us consider two planets moving away from each other at light speed (overlooking the

difficulty of a situation like this actually occurring). According to relativity, to the observer

clocks appear to be still at this extreme speed.

A diagram may help visualize the situation. First, considering Donald Duck on the Earth, he is

observing Mickey Mouse suspended in mid air while plunging onto Quarkland.

Z

V

V

B

C

A

Space-time direction of the light beam

Earth

Quarkland pos3

pos.2

pos.1

time

space

Donald

Mickey

78

The lines of the same color ending in a circle represent a single frame issued from the

relevant body. This is space-time. The shifting in space is considered null for the Earth. Shifts

are only temporal, and time moves at a right angle to space. Donald’s Earth event moves from

time position A to time position B. Transformations and movements involve the time system

only. Conversely, in the system in motion there are two combined movements. Quarkland

moves away at the same speed as a light beam. This is represented by the fact that its

trajectory is parallel to a light beam issuing from Quarkland. Past event V remains such: it

remains event V and moves at the speed of light to another place, from position 1 to position

2. The red arrow indicates a shift in space-time at the speed of light. During this shift, time

flows normally on Quarkland. Time therefore shifts from time position V to time position Z. It is

matter changing at the speed of light. This takes place in the Quarkland location. But for those

observing from the Earth location, Quarkland’s time is still. At time A, as at time B, the Earth

always receives the same frame V. The temporal evolution of Quarkland exposures as seen

from the Earth is represented by the light green circular lines. They remain invisible from

Earth. Quarkland moves away at the speed of light, and shifts with it to position 2 of the same

event V, time on Quarkland flows and takes Quarkland to position 3 as modified event Z, the

position of event Z. The event has changed, evolved from situation V to situation Z. In the

example, Mickey V is in mid air frozen while plunging into the water. The same Mickey, but

transformed after shifting to Z, is sitting down eating some food while a computer is examining

rock samples. But the Earth receives information at the speed of light. Therefore, Donald in

position B will see the second position of event V, i.e. Mickey fixed in midair. The light beams

arriving from Quarkland are always those of the same past event V. Equidistant broken lines

have been drawn, with the light beam slant at a 60° angle.

Inverting the point of observation

The 60° angle has been chosen in order to invert the perspective and take Quarkland as point

of reference rather than the Earth. A 60° angle allows for the relativity of the situation, which is

thus perfectly specular. According to Einstein’s general relativity, the same physical rules

apply to any system taken as a reference point.

The system illustrated above is rotated by 60°:

79

Quarkland is now motionless with respect to space, it is the reference point. The Earth

becomes the system in motion, and seems to be moving left at the speed of light. In fact,

Mickey sees Donald moving away at the speed of light, and he perceives himself as remaining

still. While Mickey’s time shifts from time situation (position) S to time position T, Donald’s

time shifts from time position F to time position G. But at the same time the body on which

Donald lives moves at the speed of time on Quarkland (light speed) from space position 1 of

event Fpos.1 to space position 2 of the same event Fpos.2. Therefore Mickey sees Donald

frozen in the middle of the street as he runs after Hewey, Lewey and Dewey.

The cosmos relativity angle: 60 degrees on the horizon

S

T

time

space

Terra

Quarkland

Quarkland’s light beam space-time direction

F

F

G

pos.3

pos.2

pos.1

Donald

Mickey

80

The 60° angle enables to change the point of view and have symmetric laws from any point of

the cosmos chosen to be viewed as stationary. Without this angle, relativity would be

contradicted, as the sides of the triangle – time, body moving away at the speed of light, and

light issuing from the body – would be different from each other. The 60° angle implies an

equilateral triangle made up of these three measures. The triangle can be rotated and viewed

from another direction to invert the point of observation. This is the only angle that allows for a

graphic explanation of the phenomena envisaged by Einstein’s relativity.

(go to Table of Contents) Back to “Relativity with the past” and “relativity with simultaneousness” in main document

Example: conversation between Mickey and Minnie Back to “General Relativity requires local time incurvature” in main document

As an example, Mickey and Minnie having a conversation may be considered. They are

listening to each other’s past. Before she can answer a question from Mickey, Minnie has to

listen to it. Mickey’s sound takes a while to reach Minnie’s ears. Minnie can only answer after

she interacts with Mickey’s words, once they reach her. She has to think, however quickly,

and then she answers, and Mickey has to wait for the sound to reach him, which takes a

while, and then process the sounds. Mickey interacts with the sounds, thinks and replies to

Minnie. And so on until they decide to stop the conversation.

In the events, Mickey and Minnie also use other means of communication, like intonation and

facial expressions. Intonations are built in the aural message examined. Facial expressions

travel through light, and therefore take a while to go from one interlocutor to the other. Thus

each observer communicates his/her present, which sends its image into the future. The other

space

time

81

person receives the other’s past image as his/her own present, and sends back an image of

him/herself in the future.

(go to Table of Contents) Back to “General Relativity requires local time incurvature” in main document

Simultaneous pasts of the events on the cosmological horizon Back to “Cosmos curvature diagram” in main document

In the example described above, Mickey and Donald carry on living normally, but each sees

the other motionless. Donald sees Mickey frozen in midair while diving into the water. Mickey

sees Donald while leaping across the street in pursuit of Hewey, Lewey and Dewey. Each

sees the other always midway through the unchanged event. This can be described as

simultaneousness in the distance. Both these events see the other’s past, as illustrated in the

diagram:

In this position, past and simultaneousness touch each other, as the two bodies are on the

circumference which represents simultaneousness, yet they see each other’s pasts. This

situation is different from any other. In the case of other smaller distances, the mutually

invisible simultaneousness of life on the two bodies diverges from the other body’s past, which

visibly shows itself through cosmic rays. In effect, the bodies on the cosmic horizon become

invisible: detecting instruments can reach as far as bodies situated at approximately 90% of

the distance from the horizon. It should be noted that the time directions correspond to the

evolution of matter locally, rather than to physical shifting. The fact that the directions diverge

towards the future and converge towards the past is a different phenomenon from the planets’

Time and space

Space and time

Earth Horizon Land

82

distance becoming greater or smaller, as this is a three dimensional model of a four

dimensional universe embedded in a 24 (12 time-light dimensions) dimensional cosmos.


Back to “Cosmos curvature diagram” in main document

Inconsistencies in calculating the age of the universe Back to “Exercises with light cones on the universe horizon” in main document

Back to “Virtuality of Big Bang” in main document

An article in July 13 2000 issue of «Nature»8 points out a problem recently identified in

calculating the age of pulsars: they «lie». Pulsars are generally used to double-check

calculations on the age of the universe – this problem, therefore, might lead to a revision of

the estimated age of the universe.

Pulsars are extremely dense neutron stars in which individual atoms lose their identity and

become part of a sea of particles called neutrons. A neutron star contains about as much mass as

our Sun, but is only about ten kilometers across. These stars are typically born spinning from a

catastrophic collapse and violent explosion (supernova), and have a strong magnetic field that

gives rise to twin rays of radio emission. These electromagnetic waves and vivid flashes of light in

the universe are now believed to have «lied about their age». It is the theory proposed by Bryan

Gaensler of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Dale Frail of the National Radio

Astronomy Observatory in New Mexico, after carrying out research using the Very Large Array

(VLA) radio telescope. The two researchers studied pulsar B1757-24, approximately 15,000 light

years away in the constellation of Sagittarius; the pulsar was believed to be 16,000 years old,

whereas the two scientists found that its age should be at least 40,000 years, and could even be

as much as 170,000 years. To reach its present position in 16,000 years, the pulsar should have

traveled at approximately 1600 kilometers per second, an extremely high speed compared to other

stars of its type. Gaensler and Frail compared a VLA image of the region taken in 1993 with one

from last year, to measure its change in position in a known period, and therefore calculate its

speed. The comparison has shown that the pulsar’s speed was almost 560 kilometers per second,

and therefore it took a much longer time than estimated to reach its present position. This means

that it is much older than it had been thought so far. In the last 30 years astronomers have

estimated pulsars’ age by measuring the magnetic field associated with the neutron star’s spinning

period and its slowing due to loss of energy. The difference between the age calculated with this

method and the one that emerges from the VLA study is enormous. The news update concludes

that, if the age found with this method is different from the stars’ actual local age, the

consequences might extend from astronomy to particle physics. Neutron stars are the densest

objects in the universe, and are widely used by particle physicists for the study of matter behavior

8 http://www.nature.com/nsu/000713/000713-8.html - Gaensler, B. M. & Frail, D. A. A large age for the pulsar B1757-24 from an upper limit on its proper motion. Nature 406, 158-160 (2000).

83

under extreme conditions. This might significantly affect our current knowledge and would force

scientists to do some rethinking about many present theories on the subject.

In light of this news, more inconsistencies in calculating the age since everything began are

likely to exist. The stars are much older than had been estimated, in certain cases even ten

times as much. Stars as old as these have already been found in the universe. If the age of

these stars were to be revised and multiplied by a factor as high as ten, then the universe

would be full of stars that are much older than itself. This would immediately invalidate the Big

Bang Standard Cosmology Model.

Back to “Exercises with light cones on the universe horizon” in main document

Back to “Virtuality of Big Bang” in main document


Combination of three theoretical constructs to identify ... · 1 Combination of three theoretical...

Documents

Transcript of Combination of three theoretical constructs to identify ... · 1 Combination of three theoretical...