The Real Nature Of The Universe

What is matter? How does it interact with energy? What is the nature of the universe?

These are some of the fundamental questions which have puzzled science for centuries. Although modern physics has been making astounding strides towards discovering the true nature of matter / energy, it seems that it has run head-first into the field of metaphysics. Many physicists will admit that the only way to truly interpret their findings is through not a physical, but a metaphysical, explanation.

Most of the greatest physicists of our time have been compelled to revert to metaphysics in order to explain what they were observing. Nils Bohr, the founder of the Bohr Institute, even incorporated the Tao symbol into his logo and family crest. Landmark works such as Fritjof Capra's "Tao Of Physics" undeniably connect the leading edge of nuclear physics to the conceptual works of theologies thousands of years old. Could it be that the ancient Hindus and Babylonians understood the nature of the universe better than we do? Not only is it possible, but highly likely.

Albert Einstein, who may have been the greatest thinker of our times, stated that "imagination is more important than knowledge." Yet even he was unable to solve his greatest challenge: The formulation of a Grand Unified Field Theory which would explain all the various interactions of matter / energy as the manifestations of a single, supreme force. Since his death, many fanciful theories have been proposed and quickly discredited.

However, consider that there may be a completely different and astounding theory: That of the vibrational essence of all existence. Unlike the myriad other proposals, this vibrational Grand Unified Field theory originates not just from multi-billion dollar particle smashers, but from the basic and pure comprehension of the universe shown in the most ancient writings of our ancestors. And incredibly enough, this theory not only elegantly explains the nature of matter / energy, but also correctly forecasts the discoveries at the cutting edge of physics... and beyond.

This theory is also extremely controversial and its promotion is likely to spark fistfights at any scientific gathering. I expect a few conceptual fistfights in the Comments sections of these Hubs too, especially with the more classically trained and rigorous Hub readers dedicated to the meticulous interpretation of the sacred entrails on the Altar of the Pontiff of Science as currently practiced, so it should definitely be interesting to say the least.

The "Theory of Everything" can be called a physicist's obsession. The search for a theory which would include all of the four fundamental forces of nature into an elegant set of equations describing a single fundamental force eluded Einstein to his death. Every action in the universe, whether it is the recoil of a rifle or the dynamics of a galaxy can be attributed to any combination of the four basic forces: electromagnetism, gravity, the strong, and the weak atomic force.

Since all of the matter and energy in the universe originated from a single incredibly hot point at the time of the Big Bang, it would follow that all those forces were a single force at that specific time. Not only is it feasible that all atomic particles in this primeval microscopic blast-furnace would have been the same type of particle, but further that all the particles would indeed have been the same Individual particle. As impossible as it may seem to believe, it is not only just conceivable but highly likely that a single sub-atomic particle was the cosmic egg which gave rise to the entire universe as we know it today.

Continued In:

The Real Nature Of The Universe: Strings Curled Up In Extra Dimensions?

More by this Author


Comments 19 comments

Sandyspider profile image

Sandyspider 7 years ago from Wisconsin, USA

Nice work! Love the photo!


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 7 years ago from Toronto Author

Thanks!


RVDaniels profile image

RVDaniels 7 years ago from Athens, GA

I prefer Kaku's string theory. It seems more elegant. Good Hub, friend.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 7 years ago from Toronto Author

Kaku's string field theories are pleasant enough and I do appreciate his 5-into-1 mashup for the sheer mathematical chutzpah, but there is always the same old cop out about not being able to confirm experimentally. If we're going to totally turn our backs on the scientific method, I can write a theory about how my coffee cup can turn into a multi dimensional holographic butterfly and fly to Andromeda but I can't confirm that experimentally either, so what the heck good is it? :)


Kassahun Mammo Tessema 7 years ago

1. Hallo My Dear

I would like to share U one basic fact in this Universe.

U know it has intelligence and non intelligence parts, yet again, U yourself is a subset of it. Upon it some people, that they may be not conversant or / and well-readers know well the secret of this universe, we all have to understand one fundamental thing, these people can understand this Universe by the knowledge which they receive from the Universe itself. Universe could proffer U as whatever U demand.

Even the modern science and technologies; however, it is beyond this realm / dimension and human understanding it is not obscured from the perception of the Universe and human brain.

The only difference between modern knowledge and traditional theosophy or esoteric is the physical experimentation, laboratory analysis as well as theoretical explanation, YES!!!!!!!! It > 100 % right. All the Universal laws are working ad infinitumly, in space – time or cosmos thought flaxen principles “All is in ONE and ONE is in ALL”

So, anyone has to believe in it, it is beyond an average human mind imagination and verbal expression. Therefore, as far as U are in need of this issues you have to read Ur-self and the universe that is before U; at least twice and maybe more time, then perhaps you will begin to review and know with your quick mind. However, if you attempt to judge before the entire presentation, you must then disqualify yourself as you are not ready to accept what is now before you and the whole globe, the whole universe as well. It can be materialistic politics, history, physics, science and technology or theosophy and metaphysics. Any organized function of thought is reversal through SEVEN sates of matter cycle. It is the life and death of physical nature.

It is the secret of secrets, the ultra s secret of the universe and its law! This secret is greater than any other secret that has ever been revealed and known by man, We all are ONE, there is no any secrete everything is uncovered, but I did not ignored time factor. So that U scientifically and technologically advanced people DO NOT HIDE US WHAT U HAVE AND WHAT U ARE DOING FOR UNIVERSE (PLANET’S) HUMAN WELL-BEING

GOD IS NOT FAR!!!!!!!!

Bye!!!!!!!!!;

Kassahun Mammo,

kassmatt2002yahoo.com, khebronm2010@gmail, cell Phone 251 911 137361 Addis Ababa

Ethiopia


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 7 years ago from Toronto Author

OK! Have a great day! :)


Newton'sRival 6 years ago

Here is Your Unified Theory. Case solved... It is now known as the Keeker Theory.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

????????????????


peterxdunn profile image

peterxdunn 6 years ago from manchester uk

Everything has a ground (lowest energy) state. This applies to the Universe as whole and every single thing in it (including particles and photons etc). The ultimate ground state of existence is non-existence.

All phenomena can be explained in these terms.

I could tell you where to find this explanation: a theory that unifies all forces and phenomena, but that would be against the rules.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Would I find it in the Sartre Dept.? :)


peterxdunn profile image

peterxdunn 6 years ago from manchester uk

If that 's a reference to a certain French writer: probably not.

Try Scrbd.com.

You needn't worry about the language either: I write in English.

Keep them (hubs) coming Hal.


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

Hi Peter. Sartre was an existentialist and a proponent of the philosophical non-existence concept. :)


Ik 6 years ago

This is exactly what I work on: the ultimate theory of reality, the Universe, life, and evolution. Anyone scientist, philosopher, or theoretician is welcome to drop by my blog and to falsify my theory.

Peace,

Ik


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

To FALSIFY your theory? Huh?


Ik 6 years ago

Yea, as modeled, the theory is unfalsifiable, so I seek scholars and critics and skeptics to falsify it.

I did not mean it confrontationally, just thought I would put it out there as an open invitation.

Whatever. Sorry I ever mentioned it.

Peace,

Ik


Hal Licino profile image

Hal Licino 6 years ago from Toronto Author

I don't mean to be confrontational in any way. But your use of falsify is extremely confusing. Do you mean that your theory cannot be proven wrong?


Sarah Arington 5 years ago

Anybody ever heard of creationism? Just wondering... I'd say that's a whole lot more likely than what all of you are suggesting. Plus I do not appreciate the fact that in this article, it was assumed the big bang THEORY was a scientific law. Let's not get our definitions incorrect people.


Shahidur Rahman Sikder 3 years ago

With due respect, I would like to stress upon viz. request your esteemed organization to exactly evaluate and uphold the sketch of the present universe in the midst of mankind of the Universe. There is no denying the fact that it is possible to feel or assess it through the depth of our brain and nothing else i.e. no other means. Hence, it is crystal clear that our very brain is the only Sample or Specimen or Allegory of the Universe.

Introduction of Nature of the Universe at http://shahidurrahmansikder.wordpress.com/2010/02/...


Aditya 3 years ago

Are any of you qualified to work out a hypothesis of the mechanics of the universe?

Mr. Licino, what are your credentials?

Your explanation of the Big Bang stated "Not only is it feasible that all atomic particles in this primeval microscopic blast-furnace would have been the same type of particle, but further that all the particles would indeed have been the same Individual particle."

All mathematically logical versions of the Big Bang theory suggest that there were no particles as you suggested. Having particles in an infinitesimal point makes no sense as all of the mechanics would be unsymmetrical and breakdown. The Lagrangian for the Standard Model doesn't allow for this... Pauli's exclusion principle certainly doesn't allow for this. m-theory equations don't really allow this at all.

Please base your theory on mathematical proofs.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working