Phoenix
by Dale J. Sprague
White Papers
Stephen Hawking, et al
Hawking's 'A History of Time' models the universe as one that is expanding in all directions with Earth at its center, which violates the Copernican principle regardless of the observations that support it. It can also be argued that all observations made from Earth collectively constitute a datum, which may support a hypothesis, but not a theory. Yet, given this Earth'centric hypothesis that the universe begins with infinite density and expands spherically into imaginary space with Earth at its epicenter, and holding to this, gives license to employ infinity and zero states of consciousness as integral elements of a cosmogenesis model..in that, the same license may be used in an argument for any other model.
We are given that, through the present course of space'time, the universe began at infinite density and expanded equally in all directions into zero'state space. Since infinite density is meaningless, only the idea of infinity remains. Since zero cannot define space, only the idea of zero remains. The general cosmogenesis process may be restated with 'Cosmogenesis begins and ends with infinity and zero.'
If infinity is the alpha and zero the omega of the entire universe...'How did it begin?' How could it begin without fashioning some idea of universe contraction? If the universe exists in a cycle of expansion and contraction, how can it leave its original infinite state?..and after the limit of expansion, how could it have recovered from the zero'state utter imaginary void into which it ventured?..without violating the most fundamental law of nature, the law of energy conservation.
Does the universe exist with an imaginary zero'state mind?..in that, as it exhales, an infinity state of all suddenly expands, and later, as all comes to some profound rest, inhales returning everything back to a state of infinity, when the fringes of the universe, as perceived by a Hubble telescope, shift from red to blue within a universe bounded by infinity and zero.
The ideas of zero and infinity can be applied to cosmogenesis in another way, but first, it must be assumed that the universe exists in a steady'state equilibrium; not a static state, but one that is always dynamically changing.
Since any energy state can theoretically be reduced by half, notwithstanding the uncertainty principle and technology's inherent handicap to measure..no energy state can serve as the fundamental element of matter simply because..it is always divisible. The only indivisibles known are zero and infinity states of consciousness. If they can be used as the beginning and end of the universe..why not here, as fundamental elements of matter?
Given that the genesis of zero and infinity happens simultaneously, another argument altogether, the alpha and omega simultaneously generated, as it were, zero and infinity exist symbiotically as zero'infinity, reversing the terms as one's consciousness begins with the end of the zero'infinity genesis. The first shall be last, and the last shall be first. For zero'infinity to serve as the fundamental element of matter in cosmogenesis, in addition to assuming that the universe exists in an eternal space'time continuum, it must also be assumed that the universe, its entirety, exists as one state of consciousness or another, and within this continuum, zero'infinity serves as both the genesis of matter and its mainstay as the fundamental element.
In general, the universe exists as an eternal steady'state equilibrium between zero, infinity, and energy's space'time. The realm of science depends upon zero'infinity states of consciousness to comprehend the environment while serving simultaneously as the origin of matter.
The universe is in an eternal steady'state, not homogeneous, nor isotropic necessarily, but rather an equilibrium dynamically changing...never the same from moment to moment, but ever changing by the same laws. The universe is simultaneously endowed with uniqueness and commonality. The universe existing eternally in a space'time continuum cannot, by this argument, be either infinite or finite, but rather a dichotomy of both, and always therefore..indeterminate.