# Is there something bigger?

No not God. Otherwise this would be in Religion.

Me and friend were walking home today and he told me about a movie he saw in Chemistry. It took a video of a man in the park and kept zooming out by powers of 10 every ten seconds.

Eventually they got to the power of 46 and there were small dots in an enormous empty void. Each dot represented a cluster of many universes. This also represents what we see at -46^10.

So could it no be possible that we are simply part of a larger entity, and that where the universe ends another entity begins, which would be in the form of another universe? Could there not be a bigger world that we are merely molecules in?

Now, if this were to be true, could we not also house a universe? Could we not be the entity that tiny people live in?

Just a thought.

this will be pointless, but i have a few minutes left at work.

string theory says that, according to the math we use to calculate the properties of fundamental particles, there could exist loops of string whose radius is inverse to the planck length and whose properties are exactly the same as its inverse.

basically, math voodoo says that if a proton is 10 times bigger than the planck length (which is like the size of a tree if an atom is the size of the universe) there is another particle 1/10th the size of the planck length that has the exact same properties.

so, in theory, when a black hole forms, and tons of strings fall “into” that little area that could theoretically be smaller than the planck length, they could be expanding into a different 3 dimensions or so with the exact same properties they have out here.

so basically, a black hole can be like a big bang into another dimension. but almost definetely not, in my opinion. occam says no.

I’m not sure that relates to the topic…nor am I sure of whether or not it relates to anything. So if you could explain that a little better…

It’s funny how mathematical trips into the unknown are acceptable theories, but when you posit an infinitude of worlds nested in the microcosm/macrocosm, you get the razor’s edge. In other words, for flights of fancy the fashion is to use sterile tools.

Are the movements of galaxies like colliding atoms for some higher organization? Is it that our physics oversimplifies the particle world because it cannot see beyond a certain point or timescales faster ( einstein forbid ) than light?

Those who would have a grand-theory-to-end-all-theories would place a ceiling ( or is it floor? ) on all of this because for practical purposes they need a reference point from which to draw measurements. Actually, how could anyone say this is definitely where Reality begins ( at a transcendental point? )

We wish to have models that mirror what is observable but what audacity that the basis of our Universe should be only what we detect or can concieve a framework for. Perhaps the big theories can’t be unified because they are fundamentally opposed dogmas, heuristics for the Pythagorean fetishists who are desperately puzzled about a universe that won’t sit still for the camera. Oh well, we can always paint a picture that suits a romantic ideal. Manifolds and tensors, oh my!