This thread is in response to an allegation that I follow a numerological pattern that happens to track observed measurements. As far as I know this may be correct but for whatever reason I can not see the argument. That being said I have come across a few equations that may prove their point except that I need somebody to articulate why.
.
First let me start out by saying that this example will be based on something I refer to as the macro-verse. The concept behind the macro-verse is fairly easy to understand. It starts by assuming that the universe is flat over large scales. This has been literally translated to show that the distance between an observer and the "edge" of the visible horizon is equal to 180 degrees or the single angle from which a triangle becomes a line (1=180, +1<180, -1>180). What the macro-verse does is break 180 degrees down into relative angles of time and space. The triangle that is depicted can be explained through the first two principals of universality (as I jokingly refer to them).
.
1) Every point in the visible universe rests on the origin of the big bang.
2) The space between two points is relative to an angle off of the origin.
.
By comparing the change in the base angles through time over the increasing distance between two points we can find the recession velocity of space. I get a value of 71.33747547 km per mega parsec if the universe were exactly 13.7Gyr old. The main difference between the macro-verse and the micro-verse is that they have different "degrees of freedom" (macro having two and micro having four). I want to make this as easy as possible so if the universe were 13.7Gyr old then:
.
uA1(m) = 1.389711426e-24
uA1(kg) = 1.389711426e-24 cubed
.
Note: My phone limits me to 2048 characters (spaces included) so could a Mod tie my next post to this one? If you see no need then that's fine too.
.
First let me start out by saying that this example will be based on something I refer to as the macro-verse. The concept behind the macro-verse is fairly easy to understand. It starts by assuming that the universe is flat over large scales. This has been literally translated to show that the distance between an observer and the "edge" of the visible horizon is equal to 180 degrees or the single angle from which a triangle becomes a line (1=180, +1<180, -1>180). What the macro-verse does is break 180 degrees down into relative angles of time and space. The triangle that is depicted can be explained through the first two principals of universality (as I jokingly refer to them).
.
1) Every point in the visible universe rests on the origin of the big bang.
2) The space between two points is relative to an angle off of the origin.
.
By comparing the change in the base angles through time over the increasing distance between two points we can find the recession velocity of space. I get a value of 71.33747547 km per mega parsec if the universe were exactly 13.7Gyr old. The main difference between the macro-verse and the micro-verse is that they have different "degrees of freedom" (macro having two and micro having four). I want to make this as easy as possible so if the universe were 13.7Gyr old then:
.
uA1(m) = 1.389711426e-24
uA1(kg) = 1.389711426e-24 cubed
.
Note: My phone limits me to 2048 characters (spaces included) so could a Mod tie my next post to this one? If you see no need then that's fine too.