The universe, time, and matter

A couple of months ago, during my 45 minute nightly commute to work, I had
my car's radio set in a scanning mode. At one stop it made, the first word
I heard from the speakers was "universe," upon which I immediately pushed
the scan button one time serving to halt the scanning process and lock the
station which was located. I continued to listen to what sounded like a
very intelligent man discussing what seemed to be a perspective (somewhat in
vogue now I sensed from his words) that the universe is flat. I continued
to listen even after, as it had turned out, my radio had sinned by dredging
up the Art Bell show. . .I continued to listen because occasionally, as rare
as the instances are, Art has non-UFO, non-Bigfoot, and non-remote viewing
guests; a real science laden expert, i.e. Michio Kaku. I seemed to have
lucked on another one.

His name, if I recall, is Professor Greene (of the University of North or
South Carolina, maybe?) and he has authored a book on the subject of this
flat universe view. It would have been nice to have heard more of his
comments but, in the twenty minutes I had to hear him, he said something
about which I am still thinking.

If I got it right, according to Greene, "our" universe can - and did at one
time - exist without matter. Then, and this part was over my head,
something in the nature of that nothingness caused a somethingness which
exploded (the Big Bang) and strew matter into awaiting empty space.
Relative to this ever expanding matter is the element of time. He continued
that, when looking back to the most remote edges of the visible universe, we
are actually not looking back to the beginning of time but rather to the
"edge" of time.

What does this say to you? To me, it says that neither time nor matter can
exist without the other. This may or may not be common thought, but what
are its ramifications? In the void between these ever expanding time/matter
clusters (and yes, he says that the infinite plane is peppered with an
infinite number of these "alternate universes") there is no past, present,
or future. There is no time. Therefore, it would be impossible to_ever_get
from one to another since that action would require a journey and a journey
requires time. . .time which is not available.

Does anybody (Howdy, Mr. Tung) have any light to shed on this? Does someone
know the name of the book Professor Greene was pushing on Art Bell's
program?

--
Martin
http://home.earthlink.net/~martinhowell

"Martin R. Howell" wrote:

A couple of months ago, during my 45 minute nightly commute to work, I had
my car's radio set in a scanning mode. At one stop it made, the first word
I heard from the speakers was "universe," upon which I immediately pushed
the scan button one time serving to halt the scanning process and lock the
station which was located. I continued to listen to what sounded like a
very intelligent man discussing what seemed to be a perspective (somewhat in
vogue now I sensed from his words) that the universe is flat. I continued
to listen even after, as it had turned out, my radio had sinned by dredging
up the Art Bell show. . .I continued to listen because occasionally, as rare
as the instances are, Art has non-UFO, non-Bigfoot, and non-remote viewing
guests; a real science laden expert, i.e. Michio Kaku. I seemed to have
lucked on another one.

His name, if I recall, is Professor Greene (of the University of North or
South Carolina, maybe?) and he has authored a book on the subject of this
flat universe view. It would have been nice to have heard more of his
comments but, in the twenty minutes I had to hear him, he said something
about which I am still thinking.

If I got it right, according to Greene, "our" universe can - and did at one
time - exist without matter. Then, and this part was over my head,
something in the nature of that nothingness caused a somethingness which
exploded (the Big Bang) and strew matter into awaiting empty space.
Relative to this ever expanding matter is the element of time. He continued
that, when looking back to the most remote edges of the visible universe, we
are actually not looking back to the beginning of time but rather to the
"edge" of time.

What does this say to you? To me, it says that neither time nor matter can
exist without the other. This may or may not be common thought, but what
are its ramifications? In the void between these ever expanding time/matter
clusters (and yes, he says that the infinite plane is peppered with an
infinite number of these "alternate universes") there is no past, present,
or future. There is no time. Therefore, it would be impossible to_ever_get
from one to another since that action would require a journey and a journey
requires time. . .time which is not available.

Does anybody (Howdy, Mr. Tung) have any light to shed on this? Does someone
know the name of the book Professor Greene was pushing on Art Bell's
program?

--

Check out Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" (three hours)
The PBS program is online at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs.html

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
...
"Martin R. Howell" wrote:
(snip)

Does anybody (Howdy, Mr. Tung) have any light to shed on this? Does
someone
know the name of the book Professor Greene was pushing on Art Bell's
program?

"The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene, which is on the best-seller
list.

A few years ago someone said of "Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco that it
may be the most-purchased, least read book ever. I'm afraid "Fabric of the
Cosmos" is headed for that fate. That is one dense book, and even though
I've been around this stuff for 40 years I had to plow hard to get through
it. That said, Greene is the source for the latest on string theory, etc, so
it's worth the effort. Just gird your mental loins.

Bob

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:02:48 -0500, "Bob Schmall" wrote:

A few years ago someone said of "Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco that it
may be the most-purchased, least read book ever.

Huh. I'd assign that title to Thomas Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow".
"Foucault's Pendulum" was a breeze compared to that.

I'm afraid "Fabric of the
Cosmos" is headed for that fate. That is one dense book, and even though
I've been around this stuff for 40 years I had to plow hard to get through
it.

I haven't seen it yet. How does it compare, complexity-wise, to Roger Penrose's
"The Emperor's New Mind"?

"Jim Shaffer, Jr." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:02:48 -0500, "Bob Schmall"
wrote:

A few years ago someone said of "Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco that
it
may be the most-purchased, least read book ever.

Huh. I'd assign that title to Thomas Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow".
"Foucault's Pendulum" was a breeze compared to that.

Actually that epithet is most commonly assigned to Stephen Hawking's "A
Brief History of Time," with more than 9 million copies in print... and only
3 people who finshed reading it. (j/k)

Actually that epithet is most commonly assigned to Stephen Hawking's "A
Brief History of Time," with more than 9 million copies in print... and
only
3 people who finshed reading it. (j/k)


I wasn't one of the 3, but I sure enjoy trying to understand all the
pictures in the book;-)

They're in color!! Most of them anyway.

F Marion

Compared to the Roger Penrose's books, the Fabric of Reality is a breeze. No math.

Unfortunately, there exists no direct way to test Dr Greene's theories.
Detectors have yet to be built which can detect the undetectable. !
Jerry




"Martin R. Howell" wrote:

A couple of months ago, during my 45 minute nightly commute to work, I had
my car's radio set in a scanning mode. At one stop it made, the first word
I heard from the speakers was "universe," upon which I immediately pushed
the scan button one time serving to halt the scanning process and lock the
station which was located. I continued to listen to what sounded like a
very intelligent man discussing what seemed to be a perspective (somewhat in
vogue now I sensed from his words) that the universe is flat. I continued
to listen even after, as it had turned out, my radio had sinned by dredging
up the Art Bell show. . .I continued to listen because occasionally, as rare
as the instances are, Art has non-UFO, non-Bigfoot, and non-remote viewing
guests; a real science laden expert, i.e. Michio Kaku. I seemed to have
lucked on another one.

His name, if I recall, is Professor Greene (of the University of North or
South Carolina, maybe?) and he has authored a book on the subject of this
flat universe view. It would have been nice to have heard more of his
comments but, in the twenty minutes I had to hear him, he said something
about which I am still thinking.

If I got it right, according to Greene, "our" universe can - and did at one
time - exist without matter. Then, and this part was over my head,
something in the nature of that nothingness caused a somethingness which
exploded (the Big Bang) and strew matter into awaiting empty space.
Relative to this ever expanding matter is the element of time. He continued
that, when looking back to the most remote edges of the visible universe, we
are actually not looking back to the beginning of time but rather to the
"edge" of time.

What does this say to you? To me, it says that neither time nor matter can
exist without the other. This may or may not be common thought, but what
are its ramifications? In the void between these ever expanding time/matter
clusters (and yes, he says that the infinite plane is peppered with an
infinite number of these "alternate universes") there is no past, present,
or future. There is no time. Therefore, it would be impossible to_ever_get
from one to another since that action would require a journey and a journey
requires time. . .time which is not available.

Does anybody (Howdy, Mr. Tung) have any light to shed on this? Does someone
know the name of the book Professor Greene was pushing on Art Bell's
program?

--
Martin
http://home.earthlink.net/~martinhowell

"jerry warner" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately, there exists no direct way to test Dr Greene's theories.
Detectors have yet to be built which can detect the undetectable. !
Jerry

You obviously haven't listened to enough Art Bell... *grin*

Heck... good ol' Nancy still detects her massive magnetic maroon marble of
madness swirling savagely round the sun.

I wonder what detecting Nancy's magnetic marble would be like!.


Kilolani wrote:

"jerry warner" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately, there exists no direct way to test Dr Greene's theories.
Detectors have yet to be built which can detect the undetectable. !
Jerry

You obviously haven't listened to enough Art Bell... *grin*

Heck... good ol' Nancy still detects her massive magnetic maroon marble of
madness swirling savagely round the sun.