Mid-morning. You had sent Doug an old
article you found at the Stanford site relating to cosmological inflation and this
leaves you wondering but without the wherewithal as to where to put it. Basically,
in a NASA chart: (click chart to enlarge)
** **
Timeline of the Universe
A representation of the evolution of the
universe over 13.77 billion years. The far left depicts the earliest moment we
can now probe, when a period of "inflation" produced a burst of
exponential growth in the universe. (Size is depicted by the vertical extent of
the grid in this graphic.) For the next several billion years, the expansion of
the universe gradually slowed down as the matter in the universe pulled on
itself via gravity. More recently, the expansion has begun to speed up again as
the repulsive effects of dark energy have come to dominate the expansion of the
universe. The afterglow light seen by WMAP was emitted about 375,000 years
after inflation and has traversed the universe largely unimpeded since then.
The conditions of earlier times are imprinted on this light; it also forms a
backlight for later developments of the universe.
From - http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/060915/
** **
1106
hours. I need to rein in and channel these thoughts with those posted
yesterday. It is too much for me – but all this is a part of who we are. We say
we are earthlings, but the physics of it shows we are much more than that.
2325
hours. I just sent a note to Doug.
Drop it in rather than rehash it. – Amorella
** **
Doug,
How can time
and space have always been? Does that mean 'before' anything time and space
were always there. We don't seem to define the two in terms of always. Amorella
suggests (for fiction at least) that something 'is' before the 'big bang' or
whatever you want to call it. Now - in real life if the spirit does indeed
survive death intact with mind, heart and soul then it would be plausible that
something before physics exists or did - it may have also evolved (mirror-like)
with physics. Is this plausible as a concept or is it too broad OR too narrow
in scope? What do you think?
I don't know
if you could have fractaling as a process in a spiritual like environment. Actually,
here, spiritual is not the right word. 'Movement' comes to mind or 'Stirring'
or some kind of Being that is/was outside space and time -- perhaps an
'observation' or a 'notion' or a pre-condition. Who knows. What do you think on
this or similar outlook as a concept?
Thanks for
reading. No obligation, I'm just asking. I don't really have anyone else I can
throw these thing[s] to. Shoot, just like public school. I can remember us
discussing the small unseen dust particles in the air while we were standing on
the playground at Minerva Park School. We were always coming up with stuff all
the way through high school. This is just like old times. I like it. ;-)
Dick
** **
2330
hours. I made some errors. It is just a note. This has been on my mind though.
It is down to word definitions for the pre-physics realm. Space and Time and ‘A
Conditional’ of sorts. I am in need of an analogy I can use in the book.
Post. - Amorella
No comments:
Post a Comment