Is one really All?
Allow me to explain: Reality (that is consensus reality) behaves like a canvas that shapes and transforms before the beholder.
An End to the Schrodinger Conundrum—the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle assumes that the observer also has powers to predict unconsciously the outcome. You see, the observer cannot inherently possess the qualities of a conductor, as the Uncertainty Principle implies. Because the electron appears as a wave and particle, the observer cannot have any bearing upon the outcome. The real question is the observer sees either wave or particle because both he and the electron are one and the same.
From the electron’s perspective (does this seem so outrageous? Are humans not also electrons; more complex certainly as there are amalgamations of many electrons to form layers of skin, organs, hair, etc. etc., but electrons all), is not the observer also particle and wave? Not metaphorically the same, mind you, but actually.
When you stare at your reflection before breakfast, do you marvel that you appear? Do you question whether you are there or not there? Do you wonder if you are both here and there? Do you try to walk through the looking glass? It is the same with the observer and electron, as the electron becomes reflection of the observer, and the observer reflection of the electron. As such, what measurable difference between observer and electron can there be?
Golden Symmetry—when the electron moves as does the observer. Think of the intimacy between observer and electron as analogous to the eye of the beholder, only observer and electron are more like eye and beholder. As if the observer were the eye and electron the beholder, and electron as the eye and observer as the beholder. If this relationship seems symbiotic, no actual host and parasite exist, as the existence of host and parasite assumes there is a distinction between them. With observer and electron, no such distinction exists.
Oneness as Reciprocal Union—the concept of oneness is the same mistake as the uncertainty principle assumes there is distinction between observer and electron. This thought is not in error, but incomplete. There is no distinction between any singular entities (the proverbial ‘We’ whatever that includes) from which to pinpoint an all-encompassing oneness, no origin. To say We Are All One is to observe the electron in wave state. I posit, mustn’t there first be a distinction to have elements that can connect into this action at a distance known as oneness?
Peering in again at the Uncertainty Principle: How is it possible for any one (any beholder or electron) to possess control (that is the ability to determine as observer the eventual appearance of the electron)? I mean, the idea that the observer can inherently possess the ability to control (conduct, as if the observer were separate) the universe to such an extent as to predict the electron and himself is kind of just like hugging yourself.
Let us follow another thread further. To believe that because the boat has a motor and rudder whoever holds the wheel steers the boat across the ocean is like thinking the observer controls/conducts the appearance of the electron as wave or particle. No matter what the engine horsepower or nuclear powered propulsion used, one hiccup from the ocean depths renders any expense useless. It is more like the ocean steers the boat. The conundrum of the Uncertainty Principle occurs because humans do not control the motion of electrons, they and the electron move simultaneously, neither conductor, neither observer or observed, neither at the wheel, both floating along in quantum foam.
Einstein spoke of relativity; I can see his point. In the guise of oneness, the only point of reference from which all things can be relative is the reflection, which means relativity may actually be an illusion.
Ones Within Ones (or A Way Out of the Heisenberg Absurdity) — See, the beholder and the electron may be symmetrical (do not be so limited in imagination, symmetry does not have to be identical in appearance to be symmetrical. Two concepts can be symmetrical, as such two conceptual masses, an object, can be symmetrical of one another’s motion). This is no contest to thinking; however, let us move laterally to the left and see what we can see. Imagine a Cartesian coordinate system, x-, y-axis. Turn the axis sharply to the left and arrive at a z-axis, a 90-degree turn from the y-axis. If you turn your mind 90 degrees from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle . . . are we still beholder or electron, wave or particle? This idea of borders must first be unlearned.
“People say to me, “Are you looking for the ultimate laws of physics?” No, I’m not… If it turns out there is a simple ultimate law which explains everything, so be it — that would be very nice to discover. If it turns out it’s like an onion with millions of layers… then that’s the way it is. . . . [M]y interest in science is to simply find out about the world and the more I find out the better it is, I like to find out…” ~Richard Feynman
Oneness and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle are incomplete as within the depths of their meaning sits the assumption that there is but one level of observation. That of the observer and electron as separate, so the conundrum is the observer can only see the electron as wave or particle and nothing else. Within the Uncertainty Principle and Oneness exists the real question that there is no distinction between observer and electron, like the electron the observer is both wave and particle as well. As Einstein’s theory of relativity posits, the observer and electron are relative to one another, in motion simultaneously, so observer cannot see beyond wave or particle. The illusion exists because the observer has only a single lens perspective; there are other ones. The flaw of oneness, which assumes We Are All One, rather than We Are All Ones Within Ones . . . within ones, and so forth in all directions. It is more a matter of peeling away the layers, than a single perception.
Oneness does not stop at one, no prime mover exists (no which from which there is no whicher. Apologies to my fine fellow, Alan Watts), no origin, no nicely spelt out beginning to the story, motion does not require cause and effect or effect and cause. As the photon emitted from the electron, it simply moves as randomness disguised as cause and effect.
When oneness appears as social diversity (the continual perpetual mind-spinning circular categorization of intangibles, the tree-ing of an otherwise single concept, i.e., departmental hierarchy within a body corporate) bureaucracy abounds, actually epitomizes that there is no real origin. When it is used for the pleasure of finding things out then you have onion-ing. Where each one within one has all other ones, yet, out of nothing also appears as a new one (within one). Analogous to a field of probable action constantly flexing to accommodate new ones, without bias or judgment.
Like an elaborately woven tapestry with fractal designs, the tapestry as first layer oneness (or the observer’s perspective/perception), and all the threads are the ones within. One can look at the tapestry and say We Are All One, and then one can look at a thread and say We Are All One. It is not so much that we forego the trees for the forest or the forest for the trees, as looking closely at a thread. It works in the other direction, too; the tapestry does not end at its borders. Think of the tapestry as our known universe, and the threads as people-ing, earth-ing, sun-ing, solar system-ing, hell, it could even be universe-ing.
Let us not end here (wherever ‘here’ may be; our imaginary 90-degree turn), as further question beckons: What is I?
*Image Credits (all work used with permission through CC license)–
“Limits to Growth” by anua22a
“Homage to Bosch” by ellenm1
“The Portal” by Neil Carey
“Buzzz” by Gloria
“…and so on to Infinity…” by anua22a
“Inside the Riemann Sphere” by fdecomite
“Quantum_reflections_003” by Caitlin Tobias
This post originally appeared on EXPLORINGtheLATERAL here.
- QOTD Richard Feynman (nikotheorb.wordpress.com)
- Development of Quantum Physics VI – Heisenberg Challenged Our Worldview …Again! (scientificfingerfood.wordpress.com)
- Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle/Observer Effect (frugal2free.typepad.com)
- 88-98 (nthngibbons84.wordpress.com)
- Development of Quantum Physics V – We Cannot be Sure About the World, Physics Says (scientificfingerfood.wordpress.com)
“A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.” ~Albert Einstein
Everything that the human race has done and thought is concerned with the satisfaction of felt needs and the assuagement of pain. One has to keep this constantly in mind if one wishes to understand spiritual movements and their development. Feeling and desire are the motive forces behind all human endeavour and human creation, in however exalted a guise the latter may present itself to us. Now what are the feelings and needs that have led men to religious thought and belief in the widest sense of the words? A little consideration will suffice to show us that the most varying emotions preside over the birth of religious thought and experience. With primitive man it is above all fear that evokes religious notions—fear of hunger, wild beasts, sickness, death. Since at this stage of existence understanding of causal connexions is usually poorly developed, the human mind creates for itself more or less analogous beings on whose wills and actions these fearful happenings depend. One’s object now is to secure the favour of these beings by carrying out actions and offering sacrifices which, according to the tradition handed down from generation to generation, propitiate them or make them well disposed towards a mortal.
I am speaking now of the religion of fear. This, though not created, is in an important degree stabilized by the formation of a special priestly caste which sets up as a mediator between the people and the beings they fear, and erects a hegemony on this basis. In many cases the leader or ruler whose position depends on other factors, or a privileged class, combines priestly functions with its secular authority in order to make the latter more secure; or the political rulers and the priestly caste make common cause in their own interests.
The social feelings are another source of the crystallization of religion. Fathers and mothers and the leaders of larger human communities are mortal and fallible. The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. This is the God of Providence who protects, disposes, rewards, and punishes, the God who, according to the width of the believer’s outlook, loves and cherishes the life of the tribe or of the human race, or even life as such, the comforter in sorrow and unsatisfied longing, who preserves the souls of the dead. This is the social or moral conception of God.
The Jewish scriptures admirably illustrate the development from the religion of fear to moral religion, which is continued in the New Testament. The religions of all civilized peoples, especially the peoples of the Orient, are primarily moral religions. The development from a religion of fear to moral religion is a great step in a nation’s life. That primitive religions are based entirely on fear and the religions of civilized peoples purely on morality is a prejudice against which we must be on our guard. The truth is that they are all intermediate types, with this reservation, that on the higher levels of social life the religion of morality predominates.
Common to all these types is the anthropomorphic character of their conception of God. Only individuals of exceptional endowments and exceptionally high-minded communities, as a general rule, get in any real sense beyond this level. But there is a third state of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form, and which I will call cosmic religious feeling. It is very difficult to explain this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.
The individual feels the nothingness of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvellous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. He looks upon individual existence as a sort of prison and wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear in earlier stages of development—e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learnt from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer especially, contains a much stronger element of it.
The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man’s image; so that there can be no Church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with the highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as Atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another.
How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are capable of it. We thus arrive at a conception of the relation of science to religion very different from the usual one. When one views the matter historically one is inclined to look upon science and religion as irreconcilable antagonists, and for a very obvious reason. The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events—that is, if he takes the hypothesis of causality really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple reason that a man’s actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in God’s eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an inanimate object is responsible for the motions it goes through. Hence science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man’s ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear and punishment and hope of reward after death.
It is therefore easy to see why the Churches have always fought science and persecuted its devotees. On the other hand, I maintain that cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest incitement to scientific research. Only those who realize the immense efforts and, above all, the devotion which pioneer work in theoretical science demands, can grasp the strength of the emotion out of which alone such work, remote as it is from the immediate realities of life, can issue. What a deep conviction of the rationality of the universe and what a yearning to understand, were it but a feeble reflection of the mind revealed in this world, Kepler and Newton must have had to enable them to spend years of solitary labour in disentangling the principles of celestial mechanics!
Those whose acquaintance with scientific research is derived chiefly from its practical results easily develop a completely false notion of the mentality of the men who, surrounded by a sceptical world, have shown the way to those like-minded with themselves, scattered through the earth and the centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realization of what has inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures. It is cosmic religious feeling that gives a man strength of this sort. A contemporary has said, not unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people.
You will hardly and one among the profounder sort of scientific minds without a peculiar religious feeling of his own. But it is different from the religion of the naive man. For the latter God is a being from whose care one hopes to benefit and whose punishment one fears; a sublimation of a feeling similar to that of a child for its father, a being to whom one stands to some extent in a personal relation, however deeply it may be tinged with awe.
But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is every whit as necessary and determined as the past. There is nothing divine about morality, it is a purely human affair. His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection. This feeling is the guiding principle of his life and work, in so far as he succeeds in keeping himself from the shackles of selfish desire. It is beyond question closely akin to that which has possessed the religious geniuses of all ages.
By Albert Einstein, The World as I See It, Secaucus, New Jersy: The Citadel Press, 1999, pp. 24-29.
- Science, Religion, and the Big Bang Here’s a look at the… (itsokaytobesmart.com)
Actually, it was back on February 24, 2013 that Dr. Juanita Lewis presented this award to NIKOtheOrb. I have been on a bit of a hiatus throughout that time (but have been, of late, contributing to EXPLORINGtheLATERAL, if you’d like to see some of what we’ve been up to).
My apologies for taking some months to thank The Metaphysician (a great blog, by the way, and if I could, I’d add her to the list of 15 blogs the rules require I appoint). In reading through your blog, the list of other appointed blogs to whom you bestowed this (well-deserved for them all, if you ask me) award, and the many comments and compliments you received, I am humbled to be among such great company.
And now for the rules: 1. Post a logo of the award received. [check]; 2. link back to the person who presented the award. [check — see above paragraphs and just for good measure, here you go]; 3. appoint 15 other bloggers for the award. [this will not be difficult as that includes just about everyone I follow at WP. For the list, see below]; and 4. tell 7 things about yourself [without running the risk (and lazy thing to do) of repeating myself with the 5 things I listed when the wonderful Kozo presented this blog with a Very Inspiring Blogger Award, I will do my best to give 7 new things about myself, as best as I can. No promises, though. :-D]
15 Well-Deserved Blogs and Bloggers to whom this Award is appointed and no words could accurately capture the greatness of their blogs:
1. Everyday Gurus—Everyday, Everywhere We Are Guided Towards Happiness
2. The Liberated Way—Liberty, Wisdom, Creativity (love the look of the new site!)
3. Carla R. Herrera—(some of the best creative writing on WP)
4. Holistic Words—Inspirational Words for the Holistic Mind
5. physics4me—“Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler”, Albert Einstein
6. Riding effortlessly on a large green turtle—Tall Tales of Travel, Spirit, Love, and Poetry
7. RD Revilo—Conscious Thought: Driven by Intelligent Awareness
8. bodhisattvaintraining—inner workings of an untamed mind
9. Walking No Line-–Wandering here and there, wondering at this and that, trying to find my Way.
10. Utopia or Dystopia—where past meets future
11. TreeYo Permaculture—Sustainability Education and Ecological Design
12. rarasaur—. . .frightfully wonderous things happen here.
13. EXPLORINGtheLATERAL—We live in the forest and all of our possessions fit in our backpacks [shameless plug]
14. Mind Hacks—Neuroscience and psychology tricks to find out what’s going on inside your brain.
15. h-madness—This blog follows the history of psychiatry
7 Things About Me:
1. I live with SchizoAffective Disorder and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.
2. I spend nearly everyday in the woods, walking barefoot, breathing in the trees and the soil. It’s how I keep my sanity.
3. I don’t know the names of many of the animals and insects I see in the woods, but I know much of their behavior and habits.
4. I produce and edit a nature show on YouTube (and EXPLORINGtheLATERAL) exploring our adventures in the forests, particularly hard to witness activity with birds, insects, chipmunks, snakes, turtles, and the like. We’re right down on the ground with the animals. 5. My favorite number is the Fibonacci Sequence.
6. I love to watch old science fiction films like Metropolis and THX 1138.
7. I am fortunate enough to spend every moment of everyday with my boyfriend, just hanging out.
From this quantized eBay™, humans can order, for an equally astronomical fee, packets of time to dilate their day or night. . .
Any mass object warps the spacetime surrounding it and drags spacetime along with it, causing a perversion of time. When someone wishes for more time, he or she should spin as close to the speed of light as humanly possible to increase the surrounding gravitational waves, therefore slowing time. Such that, anyone observing this “dance” (a sort of gathering momentum) will perceive the spinner as slowing down. At the point where the observer screams, “Wow! Is he/she ever moving slowly!” (or some equivalent exclamation) the spinner can stop spinning (having conserved enough momentum) and carry out the remaining tasks of his/her daily routine, comfortable in knowing he/she has now enough time. I recommend a policy be enacted into Physical Law that at certain intervals of the workday, the entire planet could spin rapidly to near the speed of light. The accumulation of energy of every Human Being equaling the entire mass of Earth’s population should slow down time for the entire planet simultaneously. If we could somehow conserve this energy, those who were on the night side of the planet could use their extra time during their daylight and vice versa—a system of lending a continuous supply of extra time. Careful monitoring would need to be implemented to ensure that no single individual spins before his or her allotted interval, throwing the entire planet into a maelstrom. This average of interactions create the perception of Time. From this quantized eBay™, humans can order, for an equally astronomical fee, packets of time to dilate their day or night. The morphing of time could be a commercial venture. Imagine a stock market determined by time rather than digits.
Never Enough Time Factor
Einstein’s theory says that uniform motion is relative. So, the Earth’s population could decide en masse to simply stand still (rest is a state of motion), effectively decreasing their velocity, acceleration, and motion to zero. This would remove the distribution of seemingly chaotic (a symptom to the Never Enough Time factor) events and human entropy from the equation of Time altogether. As the universe expands, it would drag humans along with it, stretching time out to infinite proportions relative to human perception. Much like the notion of singularity associated with falling into a black hole, and time will simply unfold before us, infinitely.
Cosmic To Do Lists
Huge amounts of Dark Energy can be utilized to accelerate the Earth to as close to near the speed of light as Earthly possible. This will slow down time enough that all the clocks on the planet will slow to a virtual stop, and all Humans will now have plenty of time to check off each task on those cosmic To Do lists, like repairing that leaky faucet, fixing that running toilet, filling in that nasty hole in the attic wall, completing the work in the Inbox at that job, reading all those new WP blog posts in that reader, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum.
If the expansion or contraction of spacetime, and consequently the expansion or contraction of Time itself, is correlated to density, then this would mean that the more humans gathered in a particular spatial geographical region, the perception of Time at that position would increase proportional to the level of attraction (gravity) and the distance relative to each person in the area. The amount of persons herded at one position is proportional to the perception of time. This proportion increases at the rate of assumptions relative to the volume of references to Time in communications. Therefore, with a cosmic density parameter, Ω0, equal to the mass of herded persons, spacetime is stretched, as well as all references to time itself.
One Final (Disturbing) Recommendation
Sir Isaac Newton postulated the Law of Gravity by the following equation: where F = the gravitational force, G = the gravitational constant, 6.67×10-11 Nm2/kg2, m = mass of an object, and r = distance between m1 and m2. Distance is measured relative to time. The concept of time is perceived relative to some other object; therefore, Time is an illusion. If time is an illusion, then distance is also an illusion and r = 0. If r = 0, then there is no gravitational force.
In his General Theory of Relativity, Einstein wrote the following equation, referred to as Einstein’s Field Equations (EFE): where Gαβ = curvature of spacetime as determined by the metric tensor, and Tαβ = stress-energy tensor. Solutions to EFE are metrics of spacetime, which constitutes the universe. If there is no gravitational force, then Gαβ = 0, and there is no spacetime curve problem. However, that would also mean there is no universe. As such, my final recommendation is that I promptly wink out of existence.
*Image Credits (used through CC license)–
“Pi: The Transcendental Number” by Tom Blackwell
“Salt Pan Stereographic Panorama” by Martin Heigan
“Warp Core” by GarlandCannon
Hyper-Sky” by Frank Hg
“Multiverse” Image by Kevin Dooley under Creative Commons license
“Corn” by Klaus Friese
“Hypnotiq No. 71” by Shane Gorski
- The Humdrum Syndrome and the Origins of the Mundane (nikotheorb.wordpress.com)
- spacetime curvature (thing) (everything2.com)
- The 11 Most Beautiful Mathematical Equations (livescience.com)
- Album: The World’s Most Beautiful Equations (livescience.com)
- “Switcheroo Gravity” – an idea Einstein missed (basicrulesoflife.wordpress.com)
- Is time disappearing from the universe? (usahitman.com)
- Gravity Assumptions Galore. (ramanan50.wordpress.com)
The Human Complaint–that there is never enough time–can be traced to the spacetime curve. Because spacetime is curved time can only follow a single one-dimensional path. Time, then, is available in only a finite amount, albeit, appearing infinite, but in actuality being a repeating finite amount. Hence, there is not enough for everyone. The Humdrum Syndrome, brought on by the Human Complaint and caused by the resulting circular path perceived by the spacetime curve, is an effect of the spacetime curve problem, and the origins of the Mundane. However, if spacetime were straight, and thus able to flow in multiple directions simultaneously, in this monochronic age where time is a resource and space a commodity, everyone perceiving in the third dimension could benefit.
The scope of the spacetime curve problem extends beyond the curvature of spacetime and cast tendrils out into the realms of velocity, acceleration, motion, position, and ultimately into the very material of human perception.
Time is a sort of Doppler Effect to human beings, derived from our perception of the length of time it takes for some perceived object to travel from point A to point B. All observed objects are the perception of electromagnetic radiation in the form of the visible photonic spectrum, called Light. When we speak of Light, we are also speaking of matter. Any mass object warps the spacetime fabric surrounding it and drags spacetime along with it, causing a twisting of spacetime.
“[There is a] dependence of space and time on velocity: at speeds near that of light, space itself becomes contracted in the direction of motion and the passage of time slows.” ~Gravitation
The very existence of mass objects causes spacetime to be curved, and that curvature determines the perception of Time. Human beings (a mass object) perceive time relative to their present position on the spacetime grid. The Humdrum Syndrome is the effect of that perception on the observer as he or she observes the universe. The expansion of the universe, too, is accelerating, so humans believe that Time is also accelerating.
The faster an object moves the slower its time relative to its motion. Humans are already moving at a fast pace (relatively); therefore, as people move faster to try to catch up with the speed of light, they should actually be moving slower relative to an observer (the clock). As a human being attempts to catch the speed of light (his “pursuit of happiness”), he is, in effect, stretching time out to infinite proportions without ever gaining any space. In other words, his distance and velocity remain at zero.
Humans always perceive other objects relative to the time taken for the electromagnetic radiation emitted by that object to reach our eyes plus the time taken for our brains to compute the apparent look-position of that object. Thus, human perception of another object is always relative to the past. Humans may not even have begun to use the time available, because humans are essentially always moving backwards (into the future; making each one of us a potential time machine, with the body as the space vessel) relative to one’s reference point. Conversely, this same logic could also be interpreted to mean that humans have already consumed the time available and no one yet has awakened to the reality that we are, in fact, “Out of Time.”
more. . .
*Image credits (all artwork used under CC license)–
“A Distortion In Spacetime” by TORLEY
“take it as you need it” by Parg
“Quantum Gravity” by NASA Goddard Photo and Video
“Untitled” by Tau Zero
- Quantum Action Policy (NIKOtheOrb.wordpress.com)
- spacetime curvature (thing) (everything2.com)
- Spacetime is smooth like whiskey and not frothy like beer (southasia.typepad.com)
- Revisiting Special Relativity: A Natural Algebraic Alternative to Minkowski Spacetime (plosone.org)
- Free E-book: Space, Time and Stuff FRANK ARNTZENIUS (2012) (organizedreligion.me)
- 234(10): The Connection and Torsion of the Dynamic Minkowski Spacetime (drmyronevans.wordpress.com)
- The world as seen by the LHC protons (motls.blogspot.com)
- Time as a property of matter (rather than space) (cordus.wordpress.com)
- Time, The Arrow of Time and Entropy (sphericalchickensinavacuum.wordpress.com)
- Is time disappearing from the universe? (myscienceacademy.org)
- Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe (lunaticoutpost.com)