If the Universe is simulation, then this simple formula makes the most sense to me, because the easiest way to store information is to compress it so that it becomes effectively nothing (zero), and all or almost all physics and math formulas we can rewrite in a form X=0, for example Newton second law we can write as F-m*a=0, where F-m*a=X. I think that this formula unites even Philosophy and Physics, because even at the first moments of Big Bang things were so different and opposite then now, that we can say they were 0, nothing, so this 0 nothing became everything X, and this everything X still always tends to be effectively 0, nothing.
So if X=0, and it is just my humble hypothesis based on my physics and philosophy knowledge, do not take it too seriously, but tell me your opinion.
When i think about most physics laws and formulas they are so simple and i wonder why people didn't earlier found them out, maybe the reason is that they expected something more complicated, but Nature is actually the more you know it and understand it, very simple in the root, and what could be more simple then X=0?
We can write all physics formulas as this, and we can explain really a lot with this one, and if we can not something, it doesn't have to be that this formula is not right, it can just be that we don't have all informations to prove that this is right, and i think that this x can be anything or everything, the important thing is that when we integrate anything and everything in infinity that somehow the result will be zero.
Once we have a mathematical expression for a physical equation, like Newton´s second law or any other one where we get two members in the equation, X = Y , it is obvious that we then necessarily also have X - Y = 0. The point here is that by doing this simple mathematical change in the physical equation we have to understand the meaning of the new object: - Y. This has deep physical significance, like the real inertia force ( - ma) in Newton´s change, f - ma = 0, as done by Jean d´Alembert in 1743.
The idea has been applied to the whole universe: its creation out of nothing, zero. You then need positive objects and negative ones with physical meaning, like positive energy (e.g. relativistic energy of the universe) and negative energy (e.g. gravitational potential energy), a "free lunch". And so on. The same happens with the physical vacuum that is full of fluctuations, virtual particles, that add up to an average zero. Applying quantum mechanical concepts, the equality of two (apparently different quanta like A(n) = B(n), n the quantum number (an integer)), implies A(n) - B(n) = 0. Here we can multiply by another growing integer N to ideally "quantize the zero", i.e.
N (A(n) - B(n)) = 0
We can think of N as a monotonically increasing nunbering, 1,2,3,.........N so that here we get the expanding universe, quantized, and adding up to zero always, but with a physical meaning for A(n) as well as for B(n).
Once we have a mathematical expression for a physical equation, like Newton´s second law or any other one where we get two members in the equation, X = Y , it is obvious that we then necessarily also have X - Y = 0. The point here is that by doing this simple mathematical change in the physical equation we have to understand the meaning of the new object: - Y. This has deep physical significance, like the real inertia force ( - ma) in Newton´s change, f - ma = 0, as done by Jean d´Alembert in 1743.
The idea has been applied to the whole universe: its creation out of nothing, zero. You then need positive objects and negative ones with physical meaning, like positive energy (e.g. relativistic energy of the universe) and negative energy (e.g. gravitational potential energy), a "free lunch". And so on. The same happens with the physical vacuum that is full of fluctuations, virtual particles, that add up to an average zero. Applying quantum mechanical concepts, the equality of two (apparently different quanta like A(n) = B(n), n the quantum number (an integer)), implies A(n) - B(n) = 0. Here we can multiply by another growing integer N to ideally "quantize the zero", i.e.
N (A(n) - B(n)) = 0
We can think of N as a monotonically increasing nunbering, 1,2,3,.........N so that here we get the expanding universe, quantized, and adding up to zero always, but with a physical meaning for A(n) as well as for B(n).
Can it be that universe is something beyond this zero? Can it be that when we are able to feel the aforesaid zero, we also feel the essence of something beyond, which the universe is, in actuality.
May be, but so far the scientific method does not appear to tell us anything.
Everything, even you and me, is effectively 0, because before we were born, we were effectively nothing, and after we will die, we will be effectively nothing. Do all 4 fundamental forces have only one purpose, to make everything (X) effectively nothing (0) , X=0? Effect of everything actualy does not have to be 0, but something that we can say X=Y, but this Y i would call nothing because i suggest that if this Y exists, it is something outside of our Universe, and in our Universe it would be nothing.
If we think about our mind and the universe, then our mind (x)-the Universe(y)=0, and vice versa. I think we can not ignore the effect of the observer when we talk about what is out there, and this simple formula perfectly describes that observer is important in theory of everything.
What is information? I guess that information is everything in a form of nothing. If everything is information, and we can not say that everything is not information, then we can say again that X=0, where this 0 is information and information by itself is not matter but it is just a special form of matter, just like if we could compress everything in the universe to (almost) nothing, then this nothing would still have all informations in itself about everything.
Arnes, I think you may find this chapter from Feynman's lectures on physics interesting, starting on p.25.10, with "Let us show you something we have recently discovered: All the laws of physics can be contained in one equation. That equation is U=0.
Arnes
It's the same as when a student solves a difficult task and in the end gets the result equals zero. Then the student says "this whole operation to a zero."
Fine, let's stipulate that the whole universe adds up to zero.
What does that mean? How does that affect the future of science and reality? What does that predict about anything?
It explains nothing (no pun intended). This is about as useful as saying that the universe adds up to a green spaghetti monster. It says nothing about the complexity of the equation.
How does this contribute to our understanding of the Nature of Reality?
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy