Principia Primordia – Meditations & Reasoning on the Structure of the Universe: Part 1 – Introduction

The Universe may never be explainable in a single formal framework – which I think is fair to say is the endeavour of contemporary theoretical physics. A unification of formal systems of prediction. Godel’s incompleteness theorem shows us that no formal axiomatic system of logic or maths can ever be ‘complete’; that is to say there will be ‘statements within it that are true but cannot be proven’, (but- may be provable in alternative formal systems of analysis which will have their own blind spots). I think the same of mathematics ability to represent the Universe. The tapestry of reality is woven by an interplay of several primordial geometric behaviours – conceptual movements in different combinations expressing emergent qualities, all manifesting through the mediums of space and time.

To digress momentarily, I would like to exercise a brief criticism of modern physics: It has become intellectually gatekept, labyrinthian, and I think suffers with an unnecessary complexity that facilitates an ‘academic sunk-cost fallacy’ of sorts. It takes 30 years to understand string theory, by which point you’ve dedicated so much time, to deny it is to put the ego on the line. And to study theoretical physics, one must do so under the guidance of a mentor already entrenched in whatever system of thinking they happened to fall into when they graduated- further perpetuating the cycle. At the end of the day- Einstein said it best; “If you can’t explain it to a child then you don’t understand it well enough.”, sometimes they muddy the water to make it seem deep.

Now, I’m not saying that mathematical complexity means that it’s wrong- maybe string theory is the way to go. What I am saying is that I think that physics (or ‘natural philosophy’, as it was once called), would benefit from returning to first principles, with a fresh mind, unconditioned in thinking by the ‘standard model’ and the ‘thats the way its done’ mindset. There is only so much use in walking the well worn path; it is unlikely to lead to innovative or novel ideas and approaches. Useful to practice, sure. Establish what’s been done, what’s proper, scope out the subject – but sometimes you start on the sensible path and find yourself so far along that you realise you missed the turning for innovation 20 years ago. Forget standing on the shoulders of giants, become one – or try, at least. (I’d like to make it clear I’m in no way deluded as to think that the ideas I am to present are not made possible by the works and genius of those who have come before me, only that if you bet on the the wrong giant, you stifle your own growth and fail to reach the heights to which you aspire – so a good perspective overview and strong foundations is of paramount and primary importance. Plus- what the heck are the giants standing on?! Probably a good place to start.)

So. I’d like to take it back to the Ancient Greeks; first principles, basic concepts, build from such behavioural precepts and in application to the current mysteries of physics – explain them. The phenomena in question? Namely: The machina behind quantum phenomena (no hidden variables, lets hear it at the back! Folly I tell ye. Just because there aren’t any hidden ‘variables’ in a subsystem that lend themselves to making better predictions of future states, doesn’t mean that there there aren’t proper reasonable and intuitive explanations for phenomena such as superposition -anyway…), also- quantum entanglement, quantum gravity, dark matter, dark energy, the arrow of time, and the question of a multiverse. All in a relatively intuitive fashion, and funnily enough – most of the explanations revolve around the simple precept of repetitive circular motion (if you’ll pardon the pun).

As well as circular motion, we have trees – or ‘fractals’, and polarity. You are familiar with scale(space) and time, no doubt; we’ll dabble with some extra dimensions, and I will explain the relevance of ‘imaginary numbers’ in synergy with the real, (don’t worry – this might sound a bit ‘far out’, but imaginary numbers are an accepted thing in the realms of mathematics, and I’ll explain them in good time).

I’d also like to express that I’m aware that a fair amount of what I’m saying is already established in a sense- for instance the ‘quantum harmonic oscillator’ being synonymous with some of what I’ll describe in building up quantum phenomena, but I am trying to take a more conceptual approach from first principles, intuitive to understand – and less of a mouthful. I’m also aware that a lot of what I will describe will be very visual and come in the forms of ‘it looks like this other thing’, which runs the risk of me sounding like an complete kook (which I won’t deny), but there is method to the madness and reasons for the comparisons I make, as they often speak of fundamental behaviours and geometries in nature- such as that of the spiral for instance, (shells, galaxies, vortices, etc…). Finally, in no way do I consider my explanations ‘complete’; they are a conceptual framework approach to some of the big questions of physics, and I don’t intend to capture all the detail and minutiae of the systems I describe – but I hope that they provide a good jumping off point, and hopefully I can cast and conjure some novel interpretations and perspectives on the great mysteries of reality.

And to finish this hastily scribbled post which I will no doubt edit and refine at some point: On a theological level – I think it no coincidence that the focal point of knowledge in the garden of Eden holds a tree, a snake (for those familiar with the Ouroboros – a snake eating it’s own tail), and the concept of opposites commonly represented as good and evil. Similarly, within it- the Awen shows us all of space and time. The mystics had it all worked out thousands of years ago, we’ve just forgotten it.