COSMIC CYBERNETICS: The Idea of a Universal Continuum

Einstein’s theories of relativity entail a variety of prospects on how the universe started – if certainly ‘started” is an applicable characterization. For probably the most half the particular and basic theories of relativity are sometimes mentioned in purely bodily phrases, that’s, with regard to an primarily mechanical view of the universe ruled by objects (mass) and concrete interactions (forces) (1920). But it’s potential to debate these theories in philosophical and logical phrases as a result of sure conclusions might be drawn from Einstein’s discoveries that makes the questions of the universe’s origin and ostensible decline appear quite perplexing.

The Motion Machine…

The logic of relativity is such that one can assume there are interactive relationships amongst mass, power, time lapse and lightweight velocity. (Adams 1997). Extra particularly, because the velocity of an object will increase, its mass tends to extend as nicely. Throughout that acceleration, time tends to decelerate. Since mass will increase and mass primarily equates with power, the potential of the latter will increase as nicely. In easy phrases, the template is as follows. An acceleration in motion enhances every part we attribute to existence. Slowing down time permits for extra intervals inside time frames in order that, for instance, what we now outline as a yr can be of longer period than in “slower” circumstances. By the identical token, acceleration makes objects extra large, which suggests they’ve larger potential gravitational affect on one another in addition to extra potential power to launch. This type of pan-embellishment makes it clear that our universe is kinetically pushed – that velocity of motion is, in a way, the unbiased variable resulting in existence.

In that context it’s fascinating (though hardly scientifically verifiable) to think about the other state of affairs – that of a slow-motion (decelerating) universe and its implications for existence, i.e. the bodily sense of being.

To start with, beginning with the premise that mild velocity causes a stoppage in time lapse, shifting again from that time to slower charges of acceleration would by definition velocity time passage. In different phrases, if one doesn’t age in any respect at mild velocity, then decreasing the velocity towards a extra regular price would, by definition improve the speed of time lapse in order that one would steadily start to age quicker. Subsequently simply as acceleration of motion slows time down, slowing the speed of acceleration causes time lapses to hurry up – which suggests not solely that we might age extra quickly, however that each one developmental, entropic and evolutionary sequential phenomena in nature would proceed extra shortly towards decay (which equates with entropy or “equilibrium).”

Since time and area are co-dependent, deceleration resulting in compressed time scales would additionally compress spatial dimensions. By the identical token, simply as acceleration will increase mass so would deceleration result in a lower in mass. Additionally, since mass equates with power, slowing down acceleration would result in a decline in power as nicely.

As a result of, in that context, the velocity at which the universe and its elements journey would appear to be a central determinant of our universe’s improvement and evolution it may be applicable to seek advice from the cosmos as being kinetically pushed, formed and decided.

The state of affairs would clearly not come into play besides at excessive ranges of deceleration however the outcomes of each excessive acceleration and deceleration are fascinating to think about. That is notably true with regard to the potential ultimate state of our universe.

Einstein’s reversal…

Based on rules of relativity concept, one would anticipate common enlargement to decelerate sooner or later. The standard assumption is that by reversing progressively the fly-apart nature of an increasing universe gravitational affect would improve, resulting in common compression. Over time, one may anticipate the contraction the speed of contraction to speed up exponentially till such time because the universe collapsed; conceivably reverting again to its unique plasmic, “cosmic egg” standing.

That state of affairs is disputed by some, corresponding to Hawking (2005) and Guth (1997) however the expansion-contraction idea has a sure logical attraction – relying on how a lot matter (darkish and in any other case) truly exists within the universe. Scientists haven’t but detected enough quantities of darkish matter to help the expansion-contraction concept. If the quantity is inadequate, the universe will in all probability proceed to unfold out till materials and drive relationships are cancelled out by distance. At that time the universe will, like all issues in nature, proceed towards a state of entropy. In that case no renewal being attainable and our universe may have been a one hit marvel.

Suppose, nevertheless, that there was adequate matter to trigger eventual contraction. What can be the logical endpoint? Wouldn’t it actually be a broaden/contract, oscillating universe that periodically dies (reaches a state of entropy), then is subsequently reborn by means of some baroque set of bodily legal guidelines that would appear to repeal Newton’s third regulation of thermodynamics, particularly the concept as soon as an object reaches entropy it is run is “over.” These questions aren’t simply answered, for quite a lot of causes.

First, if the unique cosmic egg was in a state of entropy to start with, it shouldn’t have re-generated – in different phrases it’s onerous to know how the Huge Bang might have emerged Lazarus-like from a previous state of entropy – that type of factor doesn’t occur in nature. This argument would additionally pertain to the notion of an alternating creation-destruction sequence. This raises the query of how the universe arose within the first place.

Stephen Hawking discovered this query each fascinating and complicated and handled this conundrum by suggesting the thought of a common “starting and finish” is a man-made conception, finally contraindicated by the legal guidelines of physics (2005).


There are a couple of methods to deal with the questions of origin and decay. One is to say the universe is inherently sequential, i.e. shifts forwards and backwards (not inevitably however probabilistically) between states; ie. from an entropic, timeless, black gap with mass however regardless of or capability for 3 dimensional motion, and with implicit however not manifest power – to a cloth, energized, increasing, time-governed entity as seen in our present universe. That mannequin requires acceptance of the truth that “decay, equilibrium and entropy might be overcome (ostensibly in defiance of bodily legal guidelines).

One other risk (maybe simpler to conceptualize) is that the universe obeys the legal guidelines of physics, all the time has, all the time will and, by no means reaches a state of entropy on account of an inherent a regulatory course of that retains it inside the parameters of being,

The Regulatory Thesis…

The argument for a regulated universe- i.e. one which oscillates throughout a continuum however ever reaches a state of equilibrium, is as follows:

First, the idea that common contraction would inevitably improve gravitational affect won’t be correct, as a result of because the universe contracted the capability of objects to journey quicker would decline – due partially to growing limitations on area. Moreover, as its velocity decreased, so would its mass – simply as the other happens with acceleration (e.g. the mass of an object will increase because it approaches mild velocity). Since motion dictates mass and since mass equates with power, there can be a decline in each as contraction continued. Furthermore, since gravity depends on mass and since mass declines with excessive deceleration, the affect of gravity would have a tendency to say no as properly. Lastly, with much less area during which to enact the legal guidelines of movement, the velocity of contractual acceleration would itself decline, which might trigger time to hurry up – simply because it slows down because it approaches mild velocity. With narrowed time spans, occasions would have briefer intervals to register interactions amongst matter and pressure.

In easier phrases, and in accord with Relativity Concept, simply as acceleration enhances mass, power, and by extrapolation gravitational affect, in addition to prolonging time intervals (the slower time strikes, the extra alternatives occasions should unfold) so would the other look like true. As time accelerates – in distinction to a decline in common acceleration, the speed of entropy amongst present objects and forces within the contracting universe may unfold extra quickly. In consequence, for a given time period, nothing would final for very lengthy, which suggests interactive affect of pressure and matter can be ameliorated within the excessive. In different phrases, little or no would occur because the contraction continued.

Whereas Relativity Concept doesn’t particularly handle the other of time dilation, and focuses on the place of 1 observer relative to a different in perceiving the speed of acceleration, there’s proof that clocks in some settings run slower as per slower charges of motion than others (Ashby 2003). Furthermore the relativity think about

Einstein’s principle is, whereas sensible, considerably understated. Velocity shouldn’t be merely a perform of relative perceptions. For instance if one ages slower at mild velocity than in additional regular temporal circumstances there are concrete physiological, organic results concerned which might be the truth is absolute, slightly than relative. In different phrases, if one ages slower it isn’t by comparability to different individuals. The concrete organic phenomena: nonetheless youthful pores and skin, the fantastically useful organs, the shortage of age-induced limitations on hormonal and muscular formidability can be tangible. Thus, velocity of motion has direct impression on nature even in absolute circumstances.

With regard to the re-expansion of the universe – a needed reversal if one is to consider in a kinetically pushed, self-regulating cosmos – the motion issue would as soon as once more be essential. Because the universe slowed down throughout contraction, time would velocity up. At some crucial level in contraction, interactions would start to as soon as once more speed up as a result of the time lapses between interactions would velocity up. In different phrases, with smaller time intervals the interplay of mass and pressure would happen extra quickly. As soon as that course of started, the universe would as soon as once more start to re-accelerate and swing again till such time because it re-attained one thing like its present state.

In any case, the results of exponential deceleration would resemble a cybernetic-feedback course of, analogous to the homeostatic mechanisms of organisms. In that context, velocity, presumed right here to be the prime, and unbiased (“kinetic”) variable in common operations, would offer a sort of checks and balances mechanism, preserving the universe on a continuum, all the time, and all the time working inside the parameters of bodily legal guidelines; all the time extant, by no means fairly reaching the purpose of equilibrium because of the cancellation/re-enhancement impact of deceleration and re-acceleration. In that case there can be no have to ponder the chances of utmost enlargement or full annihilation.

All of that is speculative in fact, however maybe the truth that mild velocity is a continuing and anchor level function of the cosmos may lead one to consider it serves as a gauge mechanism, and as a corollary, that movement and acceleration present the lifeblood for a perpetual universe that’s most basically kinetic.


Adams, S. (1997) Relativity: An Introduction to Area-Time Physics, CRC Press

Ashby, N. (2003) Relativity within the International Positioning System. Dwelling Evaluations in Relativity 6:16

Einstein, A. (1920) On the Concept of Time in Physics and Relativity; The Particular and Common Theories. Henri Holt

Guth, A (1997) The Inflationary Universe: The Quest for a New Principle of Cosmic Origin. Studying, Mass. Perseus Books

Hawking, S. (2005) The Origin of the Universe, Public Lectures.

Source by Robert M DePaolo