stacked universe or where does the castle go? · 51. with respect to a material spatial entity...
TRANSCRIPT
M. DAVIDOV
STACKED UNIVERSE or
Where Does the Castle Go?
2017
2
"If you build a sandcastle at the beach and then
knock it down—where does the castle go?"
Amanda Gefter, “Trespassing the Einstein Lawn”
3
“When God created space
– he created a lot of it!”
An old Irish proverb
slightly modified.
4
“Say what you will,
Professor, but you have
thought up something that
makes no sense. It may be
clever, but it altogether is
too abstruse. People will
laugh at you…”.
M. Bulgakov, Master and
Margarita
5
PART 1. Rebus
1. World – exists.
2. By “world” (depending on the context) we understand either 1) the
grand total of spatial extension, material entities and forces
(energies) presented at every singular state of the world, or, 2) the
grand total of all the states of the world as a whole.
3. Thus (in a sense of 1)), a state of the world is a singular grand total
of spatial extension, material entities and forces (energies)
altogether confined by and presented within a respective
(dimensional) space – before it is “replaced” by the next, following
state of the world. It is a material entity.
4. Thus, each state of the world, starting from Number 1 – precedes
one and only one next (following) state of the world (Numbers 2, 3,
etc.) and is the only, so called, “internal” cause of the
aforementioned state of the world.
5. Here, a diminisher “so called” is just a marker, indicating that the
“cause-effect” implementation is not homogeneous, but is an
aggregate of more than one “participant” (see further).
6. The trinity of the absolute fundamentals of the world is Space,
Energy, and Matter. (“Information” is, for now, not included in the
fundamentals because, ultimately, it is a derivative (possibly,
reversible) of Matter and/or Energy, see 167.).
6
7. Though Energy and Matter are, strictly speakin g, can be viewed as
correlates, it is methodologically justified (see further) to award them
the statuses of independent entities.
8. The modus operandi of the world is a perpetual motion.
7
PART 2. Progressionem et Mutationem
9. The manifestation of the matter in any form and substance – is a
material entity, or a material object (elementary, or composite).
Material entities (objects) are imperatively spatially shaped, defined
– they have borders, contours – in all, generally, external material
boundaries (EMB).
10. “Growing” is an increase of the numeric value of the parameter
characterizing the “quantity” of space occupied by an object/entity
within the “dimensionally” respective “container”.
11. Accordingly, “shrinking” is a decrease of the said parameter.
12. Growing and shrinking are called the “external developments”.
13. That what does not grow or shrink may, still , undertake changes.
14. The changes that do not implement growth or shrinkage are called
“ internal developments”.
15. Thus, what does not grow or shrink stil l may develop.
16. All developments may occur only within the respective existing
EMB.
17. A development that stipulates an increase or decrease of the EMB
of a given material entity/object may, also, along with spatial
alterations, cause changes of the essence of a given entity/object, or
– it may not (see further).
8
18. A development that affects spatia l localization and/or spatial
parameters within the limits of the said entity is a spatial
development.
19. Developments (structural, ‘localizational”, force - or energy
related, etc.) that may alter the “essence” of the “hosting” material
entities are “essence” developments.
20. Each material entity exists (as minimum) in the space of a
respective dimension.
21. The only material entity that does not have “space” to exist in – is
an Absolute Space, an Absolute Infinite Container (AIC). For the
purposes of our further introspections we assume that AIC is a
material entity (though not exactly – and intuitively – of the same
kind as all other material entities. Perhaps, we can look at it as at an
entity of “material potentiality” – whatever it might mean…)
22. Everything else that exists, or might exist – does exist in AIC,
within its unlimited spatial extension.
23. It is not clear how many dimensions (or, more precise, what we
call dimensions) AIC has, but, based on reasonable assumptions and
the ultimate objective of this treatise, it is needed (and plausible)
that it would have more than three dimensions.
24. All that exists, or may exist in AIC – are material entities of
several kinds.
9
25. Thus, all material entities (besides AIC) are finite.
26. The material entities might differ in their nature and in the ways
they develop and change, “under the supervision” of the different
“laws of Nature” - with one exception of a paramount significance.
Namely, starting from the state of the world Number 1 and further on
– all material entities are an absolute subject to the “cause -effect”
law: the origin and the essence of every following state of the world is
determined by each preceding state of the world – where
“determined” does not at all mean “pre-determined”, or “predicted”.
27. One of the examples of such spatial entity – is our Universe. Yes,
it is finite.
10
PART 3. Magnum et Parvum
28. Changes and developments are the processes that never stop
unless a material entity they manifest themselves through, and in,
and are tied to – seizes to exist (ergo, seizes to have its
“boundaries”).
29. All material entities may seize to exist at some point. The only
exception from this – is AIC.
30. All material entities (besides AIC) at some point came into
existence.
31. It means, that at the point of an emergence, they “started” to
occupy some space within a hierarchy of spaces; they “started” to
acquire (or preserve) spatial dimensions.
32. An important pragmatic (and, again, methodological) dist inction
between space, energy and matter should be introduced.
33. Here are the preliminary “kitchen definitions”.
34. Everything that “reasonably” can be addressed, treated or
interpreted as not space is matter.
35. Every material entity that has boundaries within an “enveloping”
space is matter.
36. That what prompts changes and developments in matter – is
energy.
11
37. There are two fundamental levels of existence and performance
with regards to matter and energy. Those are, respectively, “macro”-
level and “micro”-level.
38. Each material entity that can unequivocally be “treated” as an
entity with material “boundaries” – is a macro-entity.
39. A macro-entity always has a certain “localization” status.
40. A macro-entity with a localization status (actual or potential) is
called “an object”.
41. A potential localization status is not a probabilistic status. It is a
fixed (or, calculable) range of localizations of an object respectively
correlated to the possible affecting forces applied.
42. All material entities that do not fall under the aforementioned
descriptions and definitions are – micro-entities.
43. The nature of micro-entities (of the micro-world) may be very
complex and of a paramount importance for the functioning of the
macro-world. But for the goals and objectives of these introspections
– they are not relevant. The current discourse is focused on macro-
world only .
44. It would be invaluable to fully understand how micro-world
affects the macro-world. But this knowledge will not add anything
significant to the problematics of our treatise.
12
PART 4. Statūs de Mundi
45. The process of the successions of the states of the wor ld is a
continuous one at the micro-level and discrete (denumerable) at the
macro-level.
46. The “distance” between two successive states of the world on a
macro-level has a real value , admeasurement, which is a constant by
default.
47. The said value, i.e. the physical admeasurement of the “distance”
that separates each two successive states of the world is rather
speculative and instrumental (which does not imply that it may not,
at some point, be objectively discovered and calculated), and thus, as
such, can be established rather arbi trary, or pragmatically.
48. Each following state of the world, “normally”, should be different
from the preceding one in, at least, one “displaced” , or, “deformed”
entity of a macro-dimensional level, or of its part or element
(“belonging” to it).
49. Of a minor significance, though still worth of mentioning, a
chance exists that a certain n+1 state of the world would happen to
be an exact copy of a certain “prior” state of the world. That does not
mean that the world “returned” into the “past” (th is treatise
absolutely denies the concept of “time”, as such; the world does not
have “past” – only “passed”). It just means that the world
13
“accidentally” produced an exact “replica” of one of the previous
states of the world.
14
Potissimus
50. The central point of this work is a statement (declaration) that all
the states of the world are material entities which – being once
implemented – do not “disappear”, but remain (are preserved),
somewhat1, intact in the unceasingly growing “body” of the Universe.
We cal l this phenomenon a “Preservation Principle” (PP) .
1 In a sense addressed below, especially in Part 5 and 6.
15
PART 5. Rex Extensa
51. With respect to a material spatial entity which we call (our)
Universe – does (and did) not exist any material spatial entity
preceding it in AIC.
52. In other words, the Universe did not exist in AIC before the first
state of the world (which is the first state of our Universe) emerged
somewhere in AIC.
53. This state of the world Number 1 – equaled our Universe, it was
our Universe, because there were no any states of the world
preceding it.
54. We suggest honoring this state of the world Number 1 – the
beginning of our Universe – by a special designation: α-Point.
55. From α-Point all changes and developments of the Universe
started and continue to be.
56. Now, on a macro-level, for all further introspections – we have to
accept two notion (or, axioms), namely that
- space is a dimensional entity, and
- everything that exists – exists in the realm of the “next” respective
dimension.
57. To exist – is, indeed, to exist sometimes –on, but, mainly, to exist-
in.
16
58. A dot “exists” on a line (one -dimensional space), or, on a plane
(two-dimensional space), or, in space (three-dimensional space), etc.
59. A line “exists” on a plane, or in space, etc.
60. A plane “exists” in space, etc.
61. A solid “exists” in the “space” of the “next” dimension, etc. (we
can assume, or, even, accept, or – put it this way - that: dimensions
are associated with the whole numbers ; whether it is so in reality – is
not of relevance. Thus, let them (dimensions) be a “whole numbers
succession”).
62. It is generally acknowledged that our world has three spatial
dimensions.
63. The Universe exists in AIC.
64. Since we determined that for the “solids”, material macro-entities
(including our Universe) to “exist” means to “exist- in”– it, also,
means that the absolute, “supreme” container, the AIC, has,
inevitably, to be, at least, one dimension “further” than three -
dimensional.
65. Thus, by our assumption, it has to be, as minimum, four-
dimensional.
66. Due to an extreme difficulty for us to “visualize” the processes
within a three-dimensional world sub specia of the four-dimensional
17
vantage point – we are turning now to the analyses and
introspections with regards to the processes in our Universe (on a
macro-level!) using as a model a two-dimensional Universe in a three-
dimensional AIC.
67. We are absolutely convinced that this dimens ional “reduction” ,
performed as a methodological apparatus for the convenience of
“visualization”, will not corrupt anything important and/or
fundamental with respect to the presentation, description and
analysis of the processes that occur in our “real”, three-dimensional
Universe.
68. We will be referring (depending on what we need to see or show)
to a singular state of the world through a palette of memes – “a
sheet”, or “a slice”, or “an integument”, or “a pellicle”, or “a shawl”,
or “a mantle”, or “a cape”, or “a blanket”, or “a shell”.
69. Along with the word “growing” we will be using, as synonyms, the
“terms” “piling up” and “adding up”.
70. We will be using “terms” “ layer” and “stratum” to define a finite
integral totality of continuously successive “sheets”, “pellicles”, etc.
71. So, we start with a scenario within which the first state of the
world, the α-Point , is a “sheet”, a “two-dimensional” (as an ideal
object; in “reality” it has “thickness”) material entity of a certain
configuration and size.
18
72. It is the beginning of our Universe.
73. Starting from the emergence of the α-Point, the first state of the
world - our Universe is in an unceasing “business” of fabrication of
the – following one after another – states of the world.
74. For understanding and describing the said process – it is of a
paramount importance to look at the creation of the states of the
world Number 2 and Number 3. What’s happening there sets forth a
template of what and how takes place further on - as a manifestation
and replication of an established pattern.
19
PART 6. Ad Arbitrium
75. So, let’s , first, analyze what happens (or, might happen) in the
process of the appearance of – following α-Point - the state of the
world Number 2.
76. A priori, two scenarios seem plausible. Though caused by
different “prompters” – they will implement and result in an identical
outcome, namely: the same state of the world Number 2 would be
“generated” by α-Point and come into existence.
Let’s call these scenarios “internal” and “internal -external”.
77. The “internal” scenario implies that after its emergence – the
state of the world Number 1, α-Point, our new-born Universe – is no
further on and whatsoever a subject to any impact or effect from the
AIC. In other words – all that is needed for our Universe to continue
to be and evolve (matter in whatever form, energy – in whatever
state, space – in whatever potentiality), everything, should we
repeat, contains inside it, within its limits, “borders”.
78. In this case α-Point is the sole and only cause of the following
state of the world Number 2. Energies, forces and matter set in
motion and interdependence by, possibly, fundamental “rules of the
game”, i.e. physical laws - plus an abundance of external. AIC’s space
available – produce the state of the world Number 2 different from α-
Point in one detail .
20
79. The last italics points out to an interesting and important problem
of the arbitrariness in defining what state of the world actually is.
The answer to the problem lays in the plane of distinction between
macro- and micro worlds (see 43. and 44.).
80. Thus, following the guidelines we set for ourselves, a change of
“one detail” constitutes a new “object”.
81. Let us remind that a material object is an object of the macro
world, and as such it is determined by the matter (substance) and
energy it contains, “consists” of - within its unalienable borders . Since
the idea (and a problem) of the “border” is of a crucial importance for
us – some clarifications should be introduced.
82. For the material objects in macro-world the existence of a border
is absolutely “binary” , it is 1/0, “there is” , or ”there is not”
dichotomy. The border is a part of the object’s matter . It belongs to
the object and to the object only.
83. The nature of the object’s matter (depending on the
forces/processes associated with and within it) may, eventually ,
constitute “altered” variables of the given object, but those should be
treated (pending on the methods and criteria of calibration) as
formally independent other objects.
84. Let’s look in this connection and just for an example at two
objects - a “flower” and a “fragrant flower”.
21
85. The difference lays in the “bordered” matter and matter’s
“distribution”.
86. Let’s make a drawing of a flower and agree that it is a flower,
indeed. Here it is.
87. In a spacey “room” of the three-dimensional AIC – “floats” and
constantly grows a ream of paper (say, A4 format), representing,
conditionally, our growing Universe. Let’s “freeze” the process. On
the top sheet - we have a “drawn” image of an object of a certain
configuration – a flower. It is contoured – in a sense that all macro-
world elements and substances of this particular flower that
determine and constitute it - occupy a certain “space” on the sheet
and has definite unequivocal borders.
22
88. Now, let’s make on the “next” sheet a drawing of the same
flower, but “enrich” it with a “smell”, which we’ll depict (in a comics -
like way) by putting dots around its head.
23
Here it is.
89. The object here is the same flower with additional 20 dots
(disregard the face with the nose) intended to show that the flower
“smells”; those are micro -elements (“micro” here stands for “very
small”, but they are still macro-elements!), the material (corporeal)
entities which will affect in a due way the respective centers in the
nose, will be registered, will reach through the respective “conduits”
the brain, etc.
90. Sure, it is a pretty complex “object”, and some important issues
here should be addressed. But, f irst, a point should be made (or,
rather, a reminder). A flower with 20 dots is the gradually obtained
24
state of the world which is the result of the huge number of the
preceding states (“sheets”) of the world (again, with respect to the
chosen modus of calibration), including the “bearing” states with 19
dots, 18 dots, and so on.
91. It’s obvious, that the “final”, exemplary state of the world with 20
dots differs from the “final”, exemplary state of the world with 19
dots in “one” detail. Now, we put “one” in quote marks for a reason,
for, strictly speaking, it is not quite true. It is, if we can put it this
way, a dynamic truth with an arbitrary determination. The problem
here is of the same nature as the “zenonian” problem of determining
how one can reach natural number 20 moving to it from natural
number 19 considering an infinite set of rational and real numbers
between them.
92. Our response, then, is very simple, though a little bit rude – “let
the dead bury their own dead”.
93. For the purposes of pursuing the core objectives of the given
treatise (see 50.) and its crucial implications – we will frivolously
ignore (at least, for now) all the plethora of challenging issues tied to
whatever “zenonian” problems inherent to the continuously
developing Universe of ours. We will stick to the arbitrary solution
with respect to dynamic truth – as long as we deal with a macro-
world palimpsest of the – originally and actually – micro-world
prompted and sustained incunabula .
25
94. The contour of the object “a flower with 20 dots” is, certainly, not
as obvious as a contour of an object “a flower”. It is a composite
entity with elements detached from the “main” body and dispersed in
space. Thus, it is, strictly speaking, not a “soli d” material object , but
one with “gaps”, with “empty” spaces “inside” it.
95. Naturally, the word “empty” refers only to the graphic
representation of the whole situation, namely, to the fact that we see
untouched and unspotted white (if our paper is white, indeed) space
on a part of our untouched and unspotted (besides a drawing of a
flower and 20 dots surrounding its head) sheet of paper. In reality –
these “empty” gaps are filled with forces, energies, fields ( and,
actually, by other non-related to our “fragrant flower” object,
elements of different nature and sizes - a bee, for example) – i.e.
filled with whatever is/are the essence/-es of each and every state of
the Universe (our Sheet of Paper). How, then, the contour of our
composite object can be established?
96. To address this problem - we suggest a rather simple solution –
again, remembering that we are “working” with the macro -world and
in full accord with the core principle and our fundamental objective.
It is a “spatial solution”, or, more precise and, if possible, a
“minimum space” solution.
97. We, reasonably, assume that our drawing (a flower with 20 dots)
can be cut out with the help of scissors. Let’s, then, do it by moving
our scissors along the edges of the flower and along the “shortest”
26
lines connecting all the “external” dots (there always will be
“external” dots ) of the “fragrance”. The result will be an intricately
contoured piece of paper with a drawing of our fragrant flower.
98. We have now our object. Let’s call it F20.
99. In a similar way we can make a flower with 19 dots (cutting it out
from the “previous” sheet of paper) . Let’s call this object F19.
100. Then, in the light of all we’ve just established – F20 differs from
F19 in just one detail.
101. There are several important questions to be answered and
several important implications to be considered in this connection.
Let’s look at those.
102. First of all, let us remind ourselves that F19 and F20 are two
different macro-objects, and as such they should have their
respective borders. In the most simplistic way it should not be
difficult to grasp – in the end, they are two different configurations
on two different sheets of paper. But from what was pointed to in 82.
and in connection with the dynamic truth concept (91.) – our sheets
of paper (and they are States of the World!) – are unlike the “real”
ones – they are (sorry, for this horrible term) “post -bordered”.
103. In other words – each state of the world (sheet) is “squeezed”
between two borders. One border belongs to the given state of the
world (for example, F19), it is a previous border, a “page”, a state of
27
the world, and the other one, the following one, which it creates –
belongs to the next “page”, state of the world.
104. The stack of individual, singular – but, still, continuously flowing
from the previous to the following - sheets called Universe is piling
up.
105. Now we have to look at why and how each following state of the
world comes into being.
106. In 78. it was established that “α-Point is the sole and only cause
of the following state of the world Number 2. Energies, forces and
matter set in motion and interdependence by, possibly, fundamental
“rules of the game”, i.e. physical laws - plus an abundance of space
available – produce the state of the world Number 2…”
107. We just presume that α-Point has its border separating it from
the AIC. Otherwise, it would not be the α -Point. It contains all the
energy and substance that would prompt the process of the Univer se
growth. This Grand Total of whatever α-Point contains will -
“through” the respective (and very specially “designed” – see about it
further) borders – “flows”, “fuses” through and into each and every
following state of the world being consequently generated – till the
focus of our attention, a first macro-object comes into existence. The
macro-world – The Machina Mundi, the Celestial Mechanics - starts.
With its sequence of the states of the world and with a fundamental
law launched with emergence of α -Point still being intact: the state of
28
the world Number N is the sole and only cause of the following state
of the world Number N+1.
108. On a macro- level, in the first, “internal”, scenario (which we are
looking at now) - the emergence of each following state of the world
is caused by the forces (energies) inherent in each preceding state of
the world only. Their “grand total” is comprised of the three “types”
of energy - presented at every state (on every sheet): the preserved
“supplying” energy that “entered” into our world along with
emergence of α-Point, “kinetic” energy of each object of the given
state of the world and, respectively, its “potential” energy.
109. While the last two types of energy are somewhat (but not
without certain reservations) obvious – the first one, the “supplying”
energy, needs some scrutiny.
110. And the principle thing that should be discussed in this
connection – is a) whether we need this concept at all, b) whether
this energy is finite, and, if so, c) how heavy are the stocks of it - if it
is finite.
111. It is with a deep regret that we have to admit that at this stage
we do not have an answer to either one of those three questions.
112. But.
113. This treatise is not on cosmology (though it touches, or
scratches, here and there, on the surface of it).
29
114. It is a treatise on Preservation Principle for the macro-world.
115. And it is only with this objective in mind that we have to and can
accept the fact that any answers to the posed questions would
change nothing (well, almost nothing) with respect to the final
conclusions.
116. Regardless of the actual nature of the prompting forces and the
manner of their manifestation – the fundamental outcome is all the
same: the state of the world N+1 is created by the grand total of the
forces contained in and affecting all elements of the state of the
world number N.
117. Before moving to the second, “internal -external” scenario, we
have to relate on the fundamental nature of the AIC “substance”.
Presumably, there are two options here. Either AIC lacks any qualities
whatsoever, it “contains” an absolute “nothingness”, a really “empty”
container – or, it is “filled” (uniformly, non -uniformly, in a “patch-
like” manner, etc.) with something that we can call in “familiar”
terms as – energy, power field, “Aethereal Medium”, cosmic “wind”,
etc.
118. The “absolute nothing” does not feel good and proper to our
reason (no matter how grandeur or limited we are). “Nothing comes
from nothing” leaves no possibilities to come into existence to
anything which is “something”.
30
119. Thus, let us assume that AIC is a sort of a Leiden Jar, meaning
that it is a container ““filled” (uniformly, non-uniformly, in a “patch-
like” manner, etc.) with something that we can call in “familiar”
terms as – energy, power field (-s), “Aethereal Medium”, cosmic
“wind”, etc.” (117.)
120. What, then, would it mean in terms of supplying with “energy”
our Universe and the latter’s development?
31
PART 7. Membranae
121. By the very core of what we had postulated in the beginning of
our treatise – our Universe, starting with α-Point, is “covered” with
some kind of an integument .
122. This integument is an external boundary of the “supreme”
material entity which we call Universe. It encases our Universe - thus
distinguishing it and spatially defining, shaping it from and within the
unfathomable infinite realms of the AIC.
123. From this follows that it inherently belongs to the Universe, is a
“part” of it, and is a material entity – subject to developments and
changes.
124. It also follows that each state of the world (in the system of our
concepts) is a “one-sided coin” , it has one (and only one) integument
of its own separating it from the previous state of the world (see
below).
125. For the three-dimensional world we can imagine this integument
as indefinitely spatially stretchable “film”, “mantle” that came into
existence with the emerged Universe, constantly growing and/or
dynamically changing - thus reflecting the “shape” of the Universe,
and subject to evanescence along with the Universe if it seizes to
exist.
32
126. Unlike Universe’s – the integuments separating the consequent
states of the worlds, one from another, are, in a sense, not
“stretchable”, and, moreover, are not changeable in any way like the
whole “content” (to which they belong) of any given state of the
world after it occurs (see below).
127. The counterpart of the integument in the two -dimensional
world, the world of our “analogical” analyses, is a sort of
“lamination” .
128. We established, as a fundamental principle, that the
development of the Universe (in whatever form) is the unceasing
process of transitions of the preceding states of the world to the
following states of the world. For this process to take place – it has to
be, respectively, sustained through and by the unceasingly acting
forces that stipulate the said development.
129. The most challenging problem for understanding (or assuming)
how these forces “work” (for the “internal -external” scenario)
concerns the substance, level of, and, especially, speed and the
ways/means by which the external energy , the “energy” of AIC, enters
each following state of the world without affecting whatsoever the
previous state (-s) of the world.
130. Our vision is that it “sips” through the “laminates” which, in
reality, are semi-permeable membranes.
33
131. Yet before we move further with our introspections – we have to
put (and to answer) a “simple” question: what necessity (in the
broadest possible sense) drives the material entit ies to manifest
themselves in respective actions – be it an emittance of a wave, or a
particle, gravitation, or repulsion, and so on… Basically, “out of what
does ether feed the stars?...” (De Rerum Natura, Lucretius).
132. Everything looks pretty simple w ithin a realm of “sheets of
paper” analogy. Every new state of the world is just nothing but a
new “individual” sheet of paper with a drawing “slightly” (in a
described before sense – Part V and beyond) different than the
preceding one in a growing pile.
133. But here, though, we have a, somewhat, tricky problem of
assessing of what, in reality, is a “drawing”, especially, a drawing
called Universe.
134. The “drawing” called Universe is a grand total of all its existing
“drawings” (contours) within a given sheet of paper (state of the
world) on the background of the “empty” (actual ly, of a micro-world’s
nature) spaces (gaps, blanks) spreading throughout and covering all
the space circumscribed by the current contour of the Universe.
135. Let’s turn , first, to one heresy, and, second, to one craziness.
136. The “heresy” will sound as the “law of energy conservation for a
singular state of the world” .
34
137. The “craziness” does not have a “physical” ground at all, it is just
a liberty, a whim of a pure imagination when we will endow the
subjects and entities of our principle actors – sheets of paper and
drawings on them – with various “real” manifesting forces and
qualities.
138. As it was established earlier – the state of the world is the state
of the grand total of all its entities. It was, also, assumed that the
grand total of the “energy” of a given state of the world (being a
grand total, or a sum energy of all its components) is “transferred” to
the next state of the world minus the amount of dissipated energy
“lost’” by the entities involved in a processes of their respective
activities.
139. Is there, really, a “minus”?
140. First, here is a reminder (see 45, and, respectively, 46 -48): “The
process of the successions of the states of the world is a contin uous
one at the micro-level and discrete (denumerable) at the macro -
level”.
141. It, then, means, besides other things, that all “energy” of the
preceding state of the world is “delivered” to the next state of the
world - in and by the process of the world modus operandi - leaving
the previous state totally and absolutely void of what we will try to
describe and determine below as a purposeful (teleological), or
principal “energy” of intended (or, un - intendent) “Zilverfolgung”
35
(apologies for the German word, but could not find any more
adequate in English).
142. The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of
an isolated system remains constant. While not arguing (for now)
with the “Holy Cow” of physics – let’s look at whether what we are
describing is inconsistent with this mantra.
143. Indeed, what we are trying to convey here (in a most simplistic
and not, at all, strict way) is an idea that energy -wise each material
body in the world can be viewed from a double perspective . On one
side – it is a “reservoir” of all energies per se associated with it. On
the other side – it is the same “reservoir” of the same “energies”
needed for the performance, acting, work of the said body in
accordance with its core intended, purposeful, teleological f unction –
Zilverfolgung. To illustrate this distinction – let’s look at three
random examples.
144. Let’s turn first, to an alkaline battery.
145. Here is just one of the possible descriptions of our object:
“Primary (single-use or "disposable") batteries are used once and
discarded; the electrode materials are irreversibly changed during
discharge. Common example is an alkaline battery used for flashlights
and a multitude of portable electronic devices”.
146. It’s pretty obvious, that the Zilverfolgung of the battery is to
supply energy, say, to a flashlight. It’s, also, obvious, that at each
36
new state of the world the battery has less energy to carry on its
“mission” and purpose – and, at a certain point (at a certain stage of
the world) our battery “dies”. Which means that, while still remaining
a battery by its appearance, size, weight, inherent “internal” “micro-
world’ish” energy it contains (huge! – as any correlated energy of
mass of any material object), etc. – it seizes to be a battery by
Zilverfolgung criteria. All respective and relevant energy was given
away.
147. Because of the irreversibility of changes during discharge
(starting from the first state of the world with our battery in action) -
this battery can not be teleologically “resurrected” after its “death”.
(But what is of a paramount importance in this case – and in all other
cases of this kind, with respect to each, any , and all objects of all,
each and any state of the world – is the fact that they can be
“resurrected” (though, in a “reduced” capacity) if “treated” for this -
prior to their respective “terminal” state of the world, within a
“layer” of their life-span).
148. If we would have, instead, a rechargeable battery (“Secondary
(rechargeable) batteries can be discharged and recharged multiple
times; the original composition of the electrodes can be restored by
reverse current”) – we could bring it back to “ life” from any state of
the world it belonged to during the process of its purposeful
functioning.
37
149. So, as we see, our first object would have a significant (well,
relatively) discrepancy between its “purposeful” life and its existence
just as a certain object which looks exactly as an alkaline battery, but
incapable of “living” (i.e. functioning) the way it was (intentionally)
designed for. In other words, as a “dead” object it will be present in
the multiple successive states of the world as a “naturally” changing
“useless” object only – til l it seizes to exist as such and won’t be
found anymore starting from a certain, pretty definite state of the
world.
150. We turn to our second object, eventually, just for the reason to
emphasize and to give one more illustration to the – though minor,
but still mattering – observation on a discrepancy between the
“purposeful” and “idle” life-spans of our object.
151. So, “pet water feeder is a device that provides a flow of water
from a container in desired portions - using gravity to drop water
from the tank”. Sure, it’s very similar to the rechargeable battery –
but the difference (if we have the simplest device of this kind) is that
there is no electro-chemical processes (ultimately leading to an
“irreversibility”) are involved, and the “purposeful” and “idle” life -
spans of our object become comparable, and, even, almost identical.
What is interesting here – is the fact that if, say, a container was
made of glass and was broken, or the receptacle, made of plastic,
gave a crack – our object, in a sense, will “die” in both ways -
“purposeful” and “idle”- in the same state of the world. Yes, both
38
components can be replaced by the new ones, but what would
emerge at a certain state of the world will be, formally, a new object
(though, an old one, as well, again, in a sense…). It is noteworthy to
mention here, also, that “ irreversible” process with respect to some
“vital” components of an object should be distinct from
“irreplaceable” components of an object - implying that in the first
case the Zilverfolgung function can not be restored – period, while in
the second case there is a hope that it can be restored provided that
the “replacement parts”, still , can be, somehow, found , or newly
created. This little remark might turn out handy with our musings
over our next object.
152. Here it is, f inally, the most interesting (at least, for the author)
and the most complex and challenging object. Below - just again,
randomly – one of its definitions (from an incredible multitude):
153. “Human being - any living or extinct member of the family
Hominidae characterized by superior intell igence, articulate speech,
and erect carriage”.
154. Technically, our third object would not be so much different
from the previous two – if not one dramatic feature: superior
intelligence. So, leaving aside the taxonomical accommodations
(Hominidae), physical material essence and design (erect carriage,
etc.), and, even, articulate speech (the, so called, “second signal
system”) – let’s focus on something really fundamentally unique.
39
155. Let’s define superior intelligence through its three core
interrelated components – consciousness, reason, memory.
156. A small digression is necessary here.
157. For the final picture of the world we are trying to convey and
depict, for the world shaped and sustained by the suggested modus
operandi and its core fundamental principle, Preservation Principle,
being implemented – it would be helpful to have a special term for
describing and distinguishing the entities with regards to their per se
and Zilverfolgung functions.
158. To this end - we have chosen the idea and the concept of
“Golem”. And, more specifically, the famous Prague Golem, created
by the Maharal of Prague, Judah Loew ben Bezalel.
159. As it is known, this famous Golem was created to protect the
Jewish community of Prague from pogroms . That was this Golem’s
Zilverfolgung mission. The said Golem (as, generally all Golems
through the history) was inactive until the scroll with the word
“emet” (“truth”) was put in the hole of the clay monster’s forehead
(or, written on it) – after which process he was becoming active and
capable of carrying on his mission. The removal of the scroll (or
erasing the first letter of the word turning it into the “met”, “death”)
– deactivated the creature, leaving him waiting for the next
“recharge” when needed.
40
160. Thus, we suggest, that all entities being Zilverfolgung active –
we would call “Active Golem Objects”, or AG-objects. The same
objects which (in the full accord with the Preservation Principle) are
“left behind” in the previous sta tes of the world, possessing the per
se energy and, stil l, potentially Zilverfolgung active - we would call
“Dormant Golem Objects”, or DG -objects. And for the object not
potentially Zilverfolgung active any more, we will reserve the term
“Expired Golem Objects”, or, for the routine uniformity, EG-objects.
161. With this, a really challenging question arises: what kind of
objects (eventually, DG- and EG-objects) are in general, and, among
them, specifically , the human beings “left behind” and preserved i n
all relevant preceding states of the world?
162. We dear to suggest that – unlike AG-objects, which -
conditionally and “metaphorically” speaking – are the “actual”, “ live”,
material objects of each “actual”, “allotted” state of the macro-world
- DG- and EG-objects “turn into” and become, if we could say this, a
kind of “after”- or “post”-objects, of a sorts, and are not the subjects
to the macro-changes and macro- developments any more.
163. If some analogy would help – here is the reference to a certain
concept of thermodynamics (all italics are mine, M.D.): “A system in
thermodynamic equilibrium may, or, may not move with uniform
acceleration through space but must not change its shape or s ize
while doing so; thus it is defined by a rigid volume in space.”
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_equilibrium )
41
164. Thus, continuing our last analogy – all the “previous”, preserved
states of the world (containing all respective DG- and EG- objects) – is
the grand total of their respective adiabatic thermodynamic systems
(see next entry).
165. First – original (in Russian), then – translation into English:
"...термодинамической системой называется макроскопическая
система, которая каким-то образом (например, с помощью
реальной или воображаемой оболочки) выделена из окружающей
среды и способна взаимодействовать с ней. Если оболочка не
допускает обмен ни веществом, ни энергией между системой и
окружающей средой, то такая оболочка называется
адиабатической , а соответствующая система - изолированной или
замкнутой. Системы, у которых оболочка не препятствует обмену
веществом и энергией, называются открытыми".
"Адиабатическая термодинамическая система - изолированная
термодинамическая система, в которой отсутствует теплообмен с
внешней средой".
"Тепловое или термодинамическое равновесие - такое состояние
термодинамической системы, при котором все ее
макроскопические параметры остаются неизменными: не
меняются объем, давление, не происходит теплообмен,
отсутствуют переходы из одного агрегатного состояния в другое и
т.д. При неизменных внешних условиях любая термодинамическая
42
система самопроизвольно переходит в состояние теплового
равновесия".
"...a thermodynamic system is a macroscopic system that in some way
(for example, using a real or imaginary integument) is isolated from
the environment and is able to interact with it. If the integument
does not allow the exchange of matter or energy between the system
and the environment - then such an integument is called adiabatic ,
and the corresponding system is isolated or closed. Systems in which
the integument does not interfere with the exchange of matter and
energy are called open. "
"The adiabatic thermodynamic system is an isolated thermodynamic
system in which there is no heat exchange with the external
environment."
"Thermal or thermodynamic equilibrium is a state of a
thermodynamic system in which all its macroscopic parameters
remain unchanged: volume, pressure, heat exchange do not change,
there are no transitions from one aggregate state to another, etc.
Under constant external conditions, any thermodynamic system
spontaneously passes into a state of thermal equil ibrium".
From: http://van.physics.illinois.edu/QA/listing.php?id=5597
166. “Consciousness, reason, memory” (155.) – characterize the core
of the human identity. Actually , altogether, they are us . And as such,
within us, their material bearers (and our “design” , a propos, and it
43
should be noted – is not of such an importance , it can be replaced,
changed, altered, etc.) – they would remain as an essential
unalienable part of the preserved DG-objects (in particular) through
and within the respective layers of the piling up Universe. They can
be “resurrected” .
167. Now, this core of the human identity, “consciousness, reason,
memory”, might well be nothing more than an “information . But we
did notinclude Information in the “fundamentals” of the world along
with Space, Matter and Energy. This omission is not accidental.
Though I do believe that the World as a whole and each state of the
world in particular can be “isomorphically” represen ted by the grand
total of all their respective “data”, I wanted to avoid all the mind -
traps of profound philosophical controversies surrounding the
problems of “reality”, “representation”, etc. Besides, in light of the
core idea I pursue - of how the World operates – I suggest that the
World’s modus operandi will remain the same – whether we are
dealing with material entities, or “informational” ones. Speaking of
the latter ones metaphorically - each new “copy” (“text”) of the Book
of the Universe (i.e. each new state of the world) will gain (or, lose) a
“bit” of information – an existential equivalent of a comma added, or
a comma deleted… - in a sense of a dynamic “Library of Babel” (J. L.
Borges) …
168. But here I have to stop.
44
169. With the inevitable iron-clad necessity - all the logic of our
reflections brings us closer and closer to the most inconceivable
picture of the continuously up-building “stratiform” Universe seen as
a growing concatenation of the states of the world comprised,
mostly, of the “void” scarcely embedded with various macro- AG, -DG
and -EG-objects…
What one should do with this incomprehensive, constantly growing
and changing its form monstrous “boulder” of the Universe, where
everything is preserved, nothing disappears… a phantasmagoric
depositary of the all things passed – almost identically replicated
through the respective layers , within “Cavalieri’s planes” - through
this murky recondite Universe of ours?
170. Well, first of all nothing tells us, so far, that this construction -
true, or false - is impossible. Secondly, at least, one thing is, indeed,
undoubtful – there is enough room in the AIC to accommodate our
Universe (and countless others). Remember? “When God created
space – He created a lot of it!”
171. And, finally, the grand process of the perpetual changes and
preservation, this established “how” of ours – brings us (OK, not “us”,
but me) to the point of the ultimate frustration. It turns out that –
following again the iron-clad logic of the model - nothing can
"detach" and "leave" the Universe for the simple reason: any action
and its result in the world presented is nothing but just adding
following states of the world (the effects) preceded by the states that
45
were their generators (the causes). Detaching, leaving – those are
just newly emerging states of the same “body” of our Universe , a new
“ornament” on the “new” skin of the same old snake… “leaving” is
nothing but “leaving behind” . (And speaking of snakes - an attempt to
reach any of the previous states of the world is possible only via
spatial extension and the "deformational" generation of the growing,
"bending" pile of our stack of paper sheets (2 -dimensional analogy)
spearheaded (with its “edge”) to the "location" of the desired
previous state or layer. A sort of unfathomable Ouroboros in the
process of becoming a true Ouroboros... )
172. With all that said, what remains in the end? What is the answer
to the crucial questions: “Is the model true? Is Preservation Principle
– true?”
173. I, stil l, do not have a plausible answer to the question - in what
form and essence the entities “left behind” remain contained and
preserved in the constantly growing body of our stratiform Universe?
And, even more important – I do not have an answer to the heart of
it all: how the “previous” layers can be reached and how the desired
entities they contain can possibly be “extracted” from them and
incorporated into the “current” state of the world?
174. But it is me , who, so far, cannot answer these two questions.
And so, the entire rationale behind me presenting this open-ended
opus to the public is grounded in the desperate hope that somebody,
46
with the knowledge, intellect and capabilities stretching far beyond
my humble and limited ones, will discover the truth. It is my hope
that somebody will see what I do not see . That the flame of
somebody’s powerful imagination will reveal on a random page of my
manuscript a hidden message, written with invisible ink , containing
the answers which I myself is not aware of . In that hope, a possibility
exists that the truth might be revealed…
I want to finish with a quote from a great poet, Joseph Brodsky,
who knew nothing about the Preservation Principle, but wrote, as if
for me, these lines:
"The fire and the page, the hewed hairs and the swords, The grains
and the millstone, the whispers and the latter - God saves all that..."
(“Страницу и огонь, зерно и жернова, секиры острие и
усеченный волос - Бог сохраняет всё…”)
The End