Two Universes? Huh? & One Particle Theory…

Let's assume I am in one Universe looking out seeing the other Universe around me…
This is so because the Universe I am in cannot look at itself… How can it? How can something actually see itself without looking in a mirror, or feeling the reaction of itself (like the breeze when you move your hand fast)?
Even if only part of us is looking out, the other parts would assumedly be in the other Universe…
And, you only need two Universes at one time?
Why? Well, it comes down to an idea I'm not sure I have posted before…
The idea? That there only needs to be one particle at one time for there to be a million particles existing at one rough point during a moment… Basically the same particle moves around the whole area of the Universe, appearing to be in different places at the same time, as it moves that fast…
So my whole body is just one particle, as is someone else' s body and the rest of the Universe…
Also, the reason this one particle can see itself when there would assumedly need at least two particles, one to view and one to be viewed, is a pretty tricky concept…
Basically it may have something to do with the same way the particle remembers to be say a minute cellular body (forgive my inadequate size exaggeration) in my foot at one instant, and remember to be a tiny portion of a stone I am stepping on at another instant…
As you can see the one particle knows to be different things at different times, and it could surely follow that it may well be able to plot these things together enough for a reaction to take place…
Yet further on, our idea of this plotting of things together is mirrored in the way we are aware of the world around our sensory organs…
Anyway, back to two Universes at one time… If you consider that this one particle is one Universe, just one spot at a time… You still need something outside (or inside… I guess) of it to view it at that moment… Okay, why do we need two things, one to view and one to be (when the same particle can move that fast)? The answer is you would need to be in exactly the same place at the same time, not just roughly the same time…
I guess the question is “Are there just two Universes? Where one Universe is the Universe of that particle moving really fast, and the other Universe is another body that happens to be in roughly the same place at the same time?” or “Are there at least two Universes? Where the bodies that are roughly in the same place at the same time are permanently located bodies merely activated by the Universe of the fast moving particle?”
Okay, I've just gone on for quite a bit about two Universes and a fast moving particle… Sorry! It takes a while to describe what's going on… But, what do you make of the situation? The main reason I posted this is to hear what ideas you guys have to offer… I'd love to hear from you on this one, as it is one of my most favourite, and I think ‘out there' thoughts…
“Is there just one particle to be, and just one to see?” I guess is the main question…
“Does this illuminate how you think of the world?” is another good question…

I don't really study quantum mechanics, this is a very complicated concept to conceive of and discuss. I do know that I am very interested in the idea of multiple or parallel universes because it would explain a lot of anomolies and strange phenomena that people have experienced and tried to understand for forever it seems. I'm talking spirits, heaven, religious experience, ghosts, UFOs, angels, time travel and fairies and anything else our imaginations can conceive of.

This string theory sounds interesting although I don't really understand it, but the fact that particles vibrate at different frequencies, something about different energy signitures or something, I"m not sure.

Isn't it right that certain particles or quarks or whatever the hell they are can just dissapear and reappear somewhere else? Where do they go? Do they travel through time? Or into a parallel universe or something? I don't know but your idea about one particle two universes sounds like it fits with all this. Sounds cool to me.

Ah, ya got me what they are talking about, multiple universes? cturtle spoke of the our existence ats a molecular array of atoms (elements & compounds) which form a geometric progression. He also stated that energy exist as particles & their motion . . . the (energy ) electromagnetic spectrum extends to infinitely high frequency which could be extended that particles can be or are divided into infinitely small portions which the limit of is pure energy. This continum represents an arithmatic progression (linear) which cturtle implied both exist simultanceously. In that extent then one could consider that energy represents the universal set & matter is a proper set of it.

Did I say that?

quote:

---

the (energy ) electromagnetic spectrum extends to infinitely high frequency which could be extended that particles can be or are divided into infinitely small portions which the limit of is pure energy.

---

Well maybe I implied that in another thread? http://www.captaincynic.com/thread/69172/something-out-of-nothing.htm#69
272 Heyjme made the statement

quote:

---

To me it depends how you look at things as to in which order they form. From the small to the big I would say it is energy to mass.

---

Hmm . . .

So a geometric progression is internally bound with 2 raised to the Nth power == # of cells while an arithematic progression is externally bound & therefore N = the # of cells? {After all your hard drive is cell, you partition it & you have two ; add another partition = another cell} for a circular function?

quote:

---

an arithematic progression is externally bound & therefore N + 1 = patitions & N = the # of cells? {After all your hard drive is cell, you partition it & you have two ; add another partition = another cell} for a circular function?

---

The theory of the Atomos: greek to me but the substance of the world [matter] could be divided continueously until the remaining particle could not be subdivided [having same compostion or attributes]?So chemistry defines the world into elements, compounds & mixtures. A large body of laws were developed to measure & understand [define] elements & the forms which react to form compounds.
On the other hand we have another science saying that our universe is composed matter which galaxies, solar systems, planets and other particles {whose mass attracts them to form a mixture, the substance of our origin!

But what of the Universe just being one particle, moving very fast…
And what of the idea that one thing looks at another…

This is quite hard to explain, but here we go anyway…

Time may best be described as a process, therefore there is no real need for there to be more than one thing at one point during the process…

Existence is involved with potential energy, but consciousness is involved with kinetic energy…
The one particle is of the potential, the soul of the kinetic…

As the particle would never actually appear to move, it would be ‘virtually teleporting' (I guess if it can move one spot in one direction, it could easily move ten or more spots in that direction)…
It thus exists without acting upon another thing, and it's energy must be considered as potential, not kinetic… It is potential due to it existing at only one point in the process of time…

The consciousness is of the kinetic. This is as the consciousness, can only pick up on the senses, which, depend on movement (sound-vibration, sight-frequency of light, smell-memory related reaction, touch-impact, taste-memory related reaction)…
The consciousness (or soul) is of the kinetic due to it's existence as it relies on one thing acting upon another (the idea of development). The soul can appear see more than one particle at one time, due to it's apparent ability to remember. The soul appears to remember through it's interaction with the particle, and it's association around a particular person's body (as the body of the person is somehow linked to it's soul)…

Perhaps I would need to explain why the particle knows how to be a certain thing at different locations… However, the answer is hard to come by…
It could be out of some sort of instinct…
It may be due to memory inherent in living things (or the souls of those who have been, are still, or will be living). The way this would work is related to the way a body of a person is linked to it's soul and also the way that a person's soul is not limited to it's body alone but parts of the surrounding area…

This idea (of the souls' apparent memory) may involve there being a Universe completely filled by all the various souls, with the single particle making it's way around, one soul-spot at a time…
The souls may also not need to fill the whole Universe, but also be able to use their memory from being able to sense the space outside itself, thus filling the Universe simply with the areas inhabited by the soul…

On another note the Universe may be a virtual one, a projection out of the ability for a soul to vision an material existence…

The souls' consciousness would explain the idea of one entity looking at another…
The soul looks out, and all it can find at one time is the particle…
Thus there only needing to be one Universe of particle and one Universe of soul…
This idea only really works if all the souls truly act as one somehow… As the souls may overlap, this may be a working concept… However this would appear to challenge the idea of individuality…
It may also challenge the idea of only one soul linking to a particular body…
The idea appears to fail as a Universe of Soul would appear to contain more than one soul, thus creating more possible Universes, should the souls not overlap…
However, to one individual, there only exists two Universes, those being the Universe of the particle and the individual Universe of their own Soul (as the other souls only really interact through the particle)…
It is also quite possible that even though there may be more than one soul, that only one soul interacts with the particle at one point in the process, This would assume that there are many soul-moments within the particle-moments…

I guess a key point is that memory need not only come from one soul…
More than one soul would be affected by the same particle, thus creating memory for a ‘Universal Consciousness', from nearly the same thing being witnessed (see below).
Although individual memory must exist, perhaps because the memory of the particle interacts with the soul. Such that the memory of the past interaction (of the particle and the soul) is able to be involved with the current interaction, allowing memory of soul of itself…

The soul(s) would interact with the particle, whereupon the memory of the soul affects the particle, in a way. Perhaps one thing that happens here is the particle somehow registers that it has been sensed by the soul…
The soul needs to know the kinetic to make use of the senses…
The particle needs to carry with it the memory of the soul from it's interaction…

The illusion of movement is actually two separate events in the process in time, just seen as vaguely the same event linked by the similarity of the two events when seen by the soul.
It is involved with the memory's quality of remembering things, due to them being similar, when sensed, to the point of being nearly the same…
What is meant here is that sensing works by one sensation being close enough to another sensation, such that, they are remembered by the short-term memory, and can thus be considered as sensed…

But how does one sensation work with another, if only one particle and soul exists at one time?
Perhaps it's due to a concept of memory , where the particle knows to be certain things in certain areas, the interaction of soul and particle (within the body), and also how that a particle will find the key place related to memory (within the body) such that simply by acting in that key place (the soul knows from the area that a certain event has occurred and so a sensation can be created)… The idea of two sensations can come from the particle finding the key area that would create the actions of two sensations, and thus the soul can take it from there…
This would assume that the illusion of the two sensations (which are one) are closely related enough to be remembered from a similar point of view, due to them being within the one true sensation…

I've spent too much time and space on this already, so I'll just leave it there…
Sorry for going on for so long, as well as possibly not being as clear as would be advantageous, but hopefully I added something interesting to the thread…

BG -- If the Periodic Table of Elements does represent a geometric function then the aspect of the other theory of composition indicates that our existence is at an intersection of these systems . . . interestingly the application of elemental progression tends to result in unstable elents as the atomic mass progresses while the other is based on formation of large massive particles? Strange coincidence one could say but if the Table of Elements extend beyond our existence then {like the onion} there could exist another reality {beyond ours} composed by our galaxies just as our world is composed of elements. Another words, our existence is not the outer layer of the onion {universe}! Not that people like the idea as man's existence (supreme) becomes secondary significance in the sceme of things.

Hello. I love the idea of the one patricle theory. I have come to this conlusion myself, and I am glad to see that others have come to the same concusion/idea.
Thank you for sharing you thoughts on this subject.

Add
Subtract
Multiply
Divide
And conquer.