These are beautiful pictures of flowers my wife grew, and as a collage they make a nice way of expressing the diversity of galaxies, within context of our whole universe.:)
So you develope this sense on the large scale about what is possible given certain circumstances. What is driving inflation? As this universe expands and we realize that Omega=1 one has to assume that teetering on the brink of a topolgical form has some significane in how we see the overall expression of this same universe?
What are supersymmetrical valuations telling us about the nature of the universe in that the beginning? Is it “seed like” and how would such things be driven too, if something did not already exist? Can this nugget actually be living in nothing and arise from nothing? This logic is really hard to swallow for me, yet I recognized that a dynamcial universe needed soemthing in order to drive it from such flat state of existance, to indicators that would have revealled and explained these geometries/topologies.
/ \ / /
/ \ / /
/ \/ / --------
/ / Supergravity
If you define something arising from such a state where nothing exists, the logic saids, that the geometry could have never arisen if you did not have some motivator telling it too? So you begin to enteretain cyclical natures that would be very revealling. Steinhardt, Turok, and others start to wonder then about how these things could materialize?
So we look at the span of time in relation, from the supersymmterical state to the 300,000? Yet on a dynamical level if the universe was to level out in fifteen billions years, then we would have understood that we had only seen one part of this dynamic process revealing itself from a state of existance maybe as a nugget form, to extend itself, all the way to the outer fringes and cooling nature, in a flat state. Will it turn back to the crunch?
One consequence of general relativity is that the curvature of space depends on the ratio of rho to rho(crit). We call this ratio Omega = rho/rho(crit). For Omega less than 1, the Universe has negatively curved or hyperbolic geometry. For Omega = 1, the Universe has Euclidean or flat geometry. For Omega greater than 1, the Universe has positively curved or spherical geometry. We have already seen that the zero density case has hyperbolic geometry, since the cosmic time slices in the special relativistic coordinates were hyperboloids in this model.
So the logic is telling me that such a crunch would have had to signal other geometries/topologies, that would kick in, that taken in view of the large way in which we are taking snapshots, this consistentcy is being, and should be topolgically considered even though it is happenng on such large scales?
If a blackhole existed in the center of every galaxy, then the universal expression in nature would detail for us "phases in symmetrical breaking" within the overall larger perspective?
On this larger perspective and sense, we would see this mode of operandi, expressing itself many times not just in context of the whole universe, but within the subtle parts, all the way down to the microstates of existance? Thes ewould have to be initiated even within context of our safe and surreal world of matter states, that we have come to love and feel safe in?:)
So what does sound have to to do with all this?
I like knocking the wind out of the sails in order for one to shift perspective in how resonances might be percieved and such gatherings in nodal point cosiderations, as string indicators of gravitonic expression.
In order to shift this focus to such states of cyclical natures in the realms of topological considerations, you had to understand that even on a flat plate in Chaldni examples, these views were developing on much larger scales, on ballons with dyes, all the time revealing resonant features, to the quality of those same sounds?
Ahem!:)Ya I know. How do you transfer such thinking from orbits of Mercury and binary star rotations to signal valuations in sound determinations? Now remeber I gave a very global perspective on the unverse that include geometry/topological considerations. I wanted to shift these views to viable means of expression.:)
One the Earth as a Sphere is not so Round, and giving the symetrical relaizatin of a sphere, smaller circles and all, there had to be a way inorder to speak to the 1r radius of expresion not just a s a inverse square law valution of gravity, but also within context of other things based on this law. These within the case of the standard model would have to be inclusive in a model design.