1 of 2

I never started this with the intent of defining some ridiculously complex formula which only an Albert Einstein or Max Plank could understand, I went into it with the notion the answer was already there. I figured it should be a fairly simple problem ultimately, because absolute nothing was the lowest common denominator. It doesn't get any simpler than that, so it should be understandable in plain English, and definable in plain English, with one simple formula requiring nothing but a logical understanding of nature. That's exactly what I went looking for in physics.

From that simple point absolute chaos ensues and the problem grows exponentially, but the answer in my mind would come from a logical understanding of the process, not by wrangling the chaos one quanta at a time. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so.

Ultimately the solution should exceed hard mathematical proof, because the answer lies in the infinite. It's our brains job to devise a logical solution when infinity is involved. The hard math simply represents a tool for understanding, but math is not understanding itself. I think that's probably what Einstein meant when he said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” The math can help lead you to the wobbly edge of knowledge, but eventually that math becomes useless in defining our sense of reality. Imagination combined with logic are the only tools that can succeed when the math fails us, and applied correctly, will gain us the knowledge to move beyond to the next level of understanding.

So, without any further ado, the magic formula is;

-i / +i = -1 (i=infinity)

I know it doesn't look to difficult to grasp, but give this to anyone in physics and they'll most likely blow a gasket. They tend to hate the use of infinity in any mathematical formula. They don't want it in the universe, and they don't want it in a formula, and they generally don't even want to discuss it. We are finite. We are not expanding into any part of infinity. There is absolutely nothing beyond the universe, etc, etc, etc. Personally, I think it's the only way to solve the problem logically, so I really don't care about opinions on the matter, because an opinion is all it truly is when it comes right down to it. It is a logical opinion, or perspective on an infinite state, and what that state represents to us physically. No one knows what it means with any sense of certainty, period. Just because someone has schooling in physics, doesn't make them anymore of an authority on the subject then anyone else. It's an open subject begging for a definition as far as I'm concerned. Infinity is an intrinsic part of who we are, because we are immersed in an infinite vastness. It's undeniable.

What does infinity represent?

When I imagine the infinite vastness around us, I see motion. It's like reaching out to grab something that keeps moving a little further out of reach. As hard as you try to grab that something, it just keeps inching a little further away. It is a perpetual process which expands outward forever, never reaching a conclusion, because there is no final destination. That something just keeps on going and going forever, infinitely moving away, infinitely growing in size and magnitude, but never reaching that unobtainable end point within the infinite vastness. There is no edge, no sides, no middle. There is no top or bottom, left or right. There's no up or down. There is nothing but a dark empty vastness waiting to be defined as you reach further and further outward to grab that something. This state of expansiveness represents the positive side of infinity.

On the reciprocal side, things are exactly opposite, but still equal. It's like trying to place that same something in the palm of your hand, only to have it disappear. You thought it was there a second ago, but now you're not sure. You squint your eyes, move a little closer, and you think it's there again, and then it's gone. It keeps slipping through your grasp forever. You never could really see it, but you thought it was something, and then it was nothing. It represents a constant motion inward, perpetually moving that perceived something to an ever smaller state. There is no bottom limit, only an implied perception of something. This contracting state represents the negative side of infinity.

Both the positive and negative side of infinity represents a perpetual vastness inward and outward, which tugs against a virtual middle. It is an unresolvable mathematical problem stuck in the resolution process. Every quanta of somethingness that we perceive is a product of this infinite calculation forever trying to reach a point of equilibrium between two conflicting forces of nature. It is the positive side of infinity against the negative side of infinity, and the proof lies in +i / -i = -1.

Science has pondered the question of why matter dominated over antimatter in the early universe. It's a fairly simple answer in my mind really, because our universe has a preference of -1, not +1. Although I recognize the probability of multiverses, their relevance in defining our universe is extraneous information at this point, so I'll just touch on the subject for a moment.

Sure, there probably is another universe where +i / -i = +1, but that universe would work reciprocal to ours, and would lie outside our finite limits. There's probably trillions upon trillions of universes being born every fraction of a second, and they could be stacked one on top of another. We could be an atom within a larger universal structure, and that larger universal structure could be an atom in another. The possibilities are endless, but virtually meaningless in understanding ours.

One thing is fairly certain in my mind; all the physics in each possible universe would be perceived exactly the same as ours, because each one would either be represented as a -1, or +1. For us, that answer was -1. The proof? We're here asking the questions. If a point of equilibrium was ever possible nothing would happen. Infinity would reach a perfect balance, so +i / -i would always equal a neutral i, and we wouldn't be here. There would be a lot of potential, but the energy within that potential would forever build. I tend to think the underlying geometry of pi is ultimately the reason we're here, because pi never resolves.

(continued on next post)