Science > Physics > Probable Influence/Causation Minus Conditional Probability Theorem 2: Singularities Cause Expansion-Contraction
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"OsherD" |
| Date: |
18 Jan 2006 10:08:17 AM |
| Object: |
Probable Influence/Causation Minus Conditional Probability Theorem 2: Singularities Cause Expansion-Contraction |
From Osher Doctorow
In multivariate calculus, "radial limits" so-called along lines through
the origin (y = kx for example) don't determine limits at (0, 0) or
analogously for higher dimensions.
But on object's "orientation toward expansion-contraction" has been
argued in detail (see my past postings) to involve simultaneous
orientations in many (and theoretically all) radial directions.
Therefore, expansion-contraction from a point like (0, 0) is concerned
with "radial limits" (perhaps better called "radial modified-limits")
rather than with limits.
In the case of the expanding Universe from the time of the Big Bang,
the Universe cannot "find" a limit toward (0, 0) or (0, 0, 0) (and by
reversing directions, away from it). But it can find "radial
modified-limits". And so it searches radially and is oriented
radially rather than tangentially, contrary to almost all of physics as
practiced by physicists which is mostly concerned with
one-direction-at-a-time tangential motion or even non-motion topics.
The "radial modified-limits" ("RM-limits") are not in general the same
in different directions.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Probable Influence/Causation Minus Conditional Probability Theorem 2: Singularities Cause Expansion-Contraction |
18 Jan 2006 10:16:18 AM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
The RM-limits have no "natural" limitation on magnitude or speed,
unlike many limits in tangential motion. In motion toward or away
from a point or point-singularity, you stop at the point and don't stop
anywhere going away from the point. In tangential motion, the most
blatant example of a "natural" limitation on magnitude is a circle or
sphere, where you keep repeating the same motion in the same places.
This is most relevant to the speed of light. A radial-oriented
Universe should have no "natural" orientation toward a finite speed of
light. A tangential-oriented Universe might have such an orientation
if it strictly adhered to boundaries of closed objects. For very
large closed bounded objects astronomically, we might not notice the
difference, but it's there theoretically.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Fbrtzh" |
|
| Title: Re: Probable Influence/Causation Minus Conditional Probability Theorem 2: Singularities Cause Expansion-Contraction |
18 Jan 2006 05:19:39 PM |
|
|
"OsherD" <> wrote in message
news:1137600978.358599.219820@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
From Osher Doctorow
The RM-limits have no "natural" limitation on magnitude or speed,
unlike many limits in tangential motion.
So your RM-limits have no limits. ?
In motion toward or away
from a point or point-singularity, you stop at the point and don't stop
anywhere going away from the point.
Actually that is not true, a black hole has an event horizon which is
located a distance away from the point-singularity.
In tangential motion, the most
blatant example of a "natural" limitation on magnitude is a circle or
sphere, where you keep repeating the same motion in the same places.
Vector tangential motion?
This is most relevant to the speed of light. A radial-oriented
Universe should have no "natural" orientation toward a finite speed of
light.
What is your reason for stating such?
A tangential-oriented Universe might have such an orientation
if it strictly adhered to boundaries of closed objects. For very
large closed bounded objects astronomically, we might not notice the
difference, but it's there theoretically.
But it can be measured?
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
