The Big Whisper Model, Singularities, Black Holes and Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems.

Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash

In science, the word singularity is peculiar in that it is not based on the word single, but rather on the word singular, meaning strange. In turn, singular itself is based on the word single, yet its meaning needs to be understood as unique, as the single one standing out from the crowd. The meaning for singularity in science can be understood as that specific state for which mathematics is not providing a (clear) answer; a single area is not behaving like the rest.

Singularities are important in science because they are not only used to declare the position after passing the event horizon in Black Holes, but a singularity is also placed at the starting point for materialization. The importance of singularities cannot be overstated.

Additional linguistic complexity is presented when the word singularity occurs together with the idea of unification. With unification all matter is thought to exist in an ultimately single larger framework.

This article describes how untangling these two concepts of single and singular can help us see the big picture better.

— -

The Big Whisper model is the only scientific model about the origin of matter that declares that unification is ultimately absent. Yet before throwing the baby out with the bathwater, let it be known that unification is seen as a universal outcome nevertheless. The fine points need to be understood and what better way to explain this with the behavior of matter in our universe.

The Big Whisper theory does subscribe to unification at all material levels, except at the largest of them. At that single overall universal level, unification is not what we observe; there, it is absent.

One could declare that matter shows us a singular action at its largest of levels because matter lacks a single standard in behavior there in contrast to matter’s usual behavior. The general tendency of matter is to move toward a single outcome wherever possible.

Note how we can declare the entire material outcome in our universe as a singularity, though scientists are not using this term for this enormous circumstance.

— -

Most scientists focus on the subatomic level to declare unification as the only option forward. Yet here, too, we do not have a reality based on a single material atom or part. Quarks come in different formats, and proton and neutron are distinct from one another. Meanwhile, the electron hovers almost like an alien around the atomic center.

Unification is not based on all matter having the same identical property; unification is considered to exist among the diverse materials. This should be considered a hypothesis, yet all scientists appear to subscribe to it. If one starts out with this one consideration, then the other option is left out without being investigated.

It is true that the natural forces have been linked successfully to one another with the exception of the gravitational force. The idea is that all can be unified, but if the present facts hold — as is — then this would confirm the lack of unification at the overall level, while it is immediately visible one level below.

There is then a common playing field for weak nuclear, strong nuclear, magnetic and electric forces. Plus, a distinct overall perspective is then found with the gravitational force that is singularly removed from the common playing field.

This is important information. Like a house being the overall outcome of brick, mortar, glass and tile, gravity would then be the outcome based on nothing but the right combination of the other forces.

The (Big) Whisper Model

The Whisper model is based on the mechanics of pressure. Whether discussing a maximum-pressurized state or a depressed state, the model functions the same way in that the mechanics show a non-active center with an extremely active layer right around it.

A hurricane is a good first phenomenon to discuss. Due to increased water temperatures and other influences, the low-pressure center of the cyclonic storm can sometimes cause blue skies to appear overhead. The atmospheric pull away from the center can create extremely small cyclonic eyes (less than 2 miles) or very large eyes (more than 200 miles wide) in which not that much exciting is happening. Most important to note is how this eye, that has barely any wind movement in it, is closely surrounded by the strongest winds measured on earth.

One could express the maximum of movement due to pressure as 1, and this is placed right-smack next to a minimum of movement due to pressure, expressed with 0. This is the main feature of the Whisper model: 0 in the center, 1 sitting right next to it, and a diminishing number between 1 and 0 the further out from the center.

— -

While the actual results may not exclusively end up as three distinct zones (there can be more), the Whisper model declares three zones based on the mechanics of pressure:

Applying these zones to the center of the Earth, Zone 1 would coincide with the solid inner core of our planet. The term dead-calm is still applicable to this utmost pressurized location in that no movement is experienced within Zone 1. Zone 2 would coincide with the fluid outer core, while Zone 3 would indicate all other zones known from geology.

The Whisper model is based on the mechanics of pressure only and other important aspects such as temperature and composition of matter fall outside this model. More on this later.

— For a hurricane, in which pressure dynamics establish a depression, the wall of the eye can be used to declare the main feature of the Whisper model.
— For the center of the earth, in which pressure is maximized, the extreme churning right next to the solid inner core is what makes the Whisper model special.

It is therefore possible to declare Zone 2 as just the extreme wall of movement, not much more than just that layer of extreme churning, though in this article Zone 2 is larger. In the fluid outer core of Zone 2 the transition is from extreme churning to experiencing less but sustained movement further away from the center.

Right where the first option for friction is available, we find the largest amount of pressure capable of expressing itself into movement.

The aspect to focus on is how pressure and nothing else establishes a sharp contrast between Zone 1 and Zone 2. Consider all mass underneath South-Africa and pressure builds the closer we get to the center of our planet. In the center, the pressure is at its maximum and this solidified the center. Yet right where the first option for friction is available, we find the largest amount of pressure capable of expressing itself into movement. The churning in Zone 2 will therefore be most intense right next to Zone 1 because the mechanics of pressure are such that each next layer is a maximized condition. Pressure-wise, everything underneath South-Africa is expressed as side-way movement at the border of the solid inner core of our planet.

To complete the model: the distinction between Zone 2 and Zone 3 is less emphasized in the Whisper model and temperature and composition can indeed play larger roles here than the mechanics of pressure to explain any additionally encountered layers. While the boundary is not clear, Zone 3 represents those pressure conditions where matter behaves within a common norm. Matter can be considered normalized in Zone 3 and extreme movements occurring are never sustained.

With declaring Zone 3 normal, the combination of Zones 1 and 2 can be declared a singularity for the planet. Again, this word use is not standard in science, yet matter behaves singularly distinct here due to the experienced pressure. With this unusual word use here, it may become possible to focus on singularities better later.

The extreme churning of Zone 2 right next to Zone 1 contributes to higher temperatures of Zone 2, and therefore to the warming of our Earth. The solid inner core, Zone 1, would be cooler than next-door Zone 2. Heat can warm the center, but the true heat flows of Zone 2 will be outbound in this fluid environment.

The focus in the Whisper model is on the mechanics of pressure.

When pressure is maximized, such as with matter inside a planet, then temperature does play an important role with heat creation. When pressure is depressed, such as with a hurricane, then volatility is the main ingredient of the wall. Though temperature plays a crucial role in establishing a cyclonic storm, the storm movements themselves do not generate a substantially higher temperature.

While the zones in the Whisper model can be considered identical, the temperature property differs between a depressed whisper and an internally maximized whisper.

— -

The Whisper model becomes particularly interesting if applied to the materialization process of our universe and to so-called Black Holes. For the materialization process, the term whisper is modified as Big Whisper, an analogy to Big Bang.

— -

Black Holes

Applying the pressure model to Black Holes, gravity is seen as the source to influence the pressure mechanics in the center of our Milky Way. Scientists agree that specific gravitational locations exist in and around material bodies, known as LaGrange points. However, in the center of a galaxy a centroid location exists, also known as the barycenter of a galaxy, and if called a LaGrange point this would be the mother of all LaGrange points.

Here, too, something peculiar is going on. Not only is the centroid position of our Milky Way a location based on the collective reality of matter in the galaxy, scientists also propose it to be an individuated location for a piece of matter of extraordinary proportions. It is matter collapsed onto itself to the point it has become invisible — a highly peculiar statement.

It would be like stating that the Eye of the Storm is not only based on the overall circumstances, but that it contains a material entity inside the center as well, invisible to the naked eye.

Naturally, we all know that there is no material entity inside a hurricane; the Eye is a phenomenon of circumstances. This scientifically doubling of positions — the centroid LaGrange point and the Black Hole material mass — needs to be investigated.

When applying the Whisper model to Black Holes it can get confusing quickly. Let’s therefore change the term Black Hole into Black Eye for the Whisper model to make the distinction clear. In a Black Eye, matter is not envisioned in the center. If matter were suddenly captured in this location, then it would be torn apart and strewn about rather quickly, by sheer gravitational force. Like a hurricane, a Black Eye is a depression of gravitational forces. Material spouts at 90 degree angles — from the disk into space — are the locations through which most of the torn matter is dispersed.

In contrast, scientists follow with a Black Hole a center with extremely maximized pressures for matter, a mathematically possible position first calculated on paper. Later, it was seen that Albert Einstein’s General Relativity could be applied with the proposed Black Hole as a result. There is scientific consensus that supermassive Black Holes exist in the center of galaxies and that they are collapsed matter with gravity so strong that not even light can escape its attraction.

— -

Reviewing the Black Eye and the Black Hole descriptions from the perspective of pressure, both take in an opposite position. With the Black Eye the centroid position is declared as a phenomenon that is created by masses in the galaxy surrounding the centroid position, and this area is not generating any substantial heat by itself. In contrast, the Black Hole description declares the centroid position as that spot that contains an invisible and enormous mass that collapsed onto itself, and while heat should be generated here, gravity is proposed to be such that temperature cannot be expressed either.

One can readily find descriptions how a Black Hole is established on the internet. Let’s focus on the Black Eye description using the Whisper pressure model.

All celestial masses surrounding the centroid point in a galaxy have their own gravitational fields. Let’s translate this image of many masses into a large collection of self-centered material behaviors, each with enormous spheres of influence — think fiefdoms, each with a king or queen. Next, these fiefdoms can also unite into a larger union. Where these spheres of gravitational influence combine, an enormous pull is exerted in all directions. The fiefdoms united in a union can outshine all other independent fiefdoms. But note, too, how the ‘throne’ of the ruler of the union increases in power when more fiefdoms join the union.

Most importantly therefore: In a large collective, such as a galaxy, the centroid position should show the greatest gravitational pull of the galaxy. The ‘throne’ in the centroid position should have the greatest power. A tremendous depression of gravitational forces can then be said to exist as phenomenon in the center of galaxies.

Naturally, masses on the outside of galaxies may be too far removed to establish a measurable effect to the centroid position. However, even when far-removed from the center, a collective contributing factor cannot be excluded as contributing to the pull experienced in the center. More direct and perhaps more logical, one can consider the masses in the larger center of a galaxy to do most of the pulling for this centroid position.

— -

In the Whisper model, the depression in the center would not be a place with much action — Zone 1. Yet right-smack next to this net-zero location, right where the tiniest amount of friction among the gravitational forces can occur, that is where the strongest gravitational forces in a galaxy would find their expression. The gravitational max of 1 sits then right next to the gravitational dud of 0 in the center of a galaxy. No other spot in the galaxy comes close to that gravitational max of 1.

Any object that would move toward a Black Eye would experience the pull from all masses from all sides around that Black Eye. Like an airplane flying in a straight line toward the wall of the Eye of the Storm, in this case incapable of steering but capable of staying in the air, that airplane would not fly the way the crow flies. The wall of the Eye of the Storm would establish the airplane’s course toward and then away from the Eye. The path would be a hyperbola, parabola or showing elliptical features. If caught by the wall, the path of the plane would become circular.

Those masses unfortunate to indeed make it to the center of the gravitational monster would get torn up not by the center but by encountering the forces of the wall, from inside the eye. A mass found on the inside would stay on the inside and be torn to pieces. Exit points for this matter would be the two spouts at 90-degree angles while torn material would also be thrown back into the wall and dispersed. As we know, the spouts can be visible, but torn matter thrown back into the wall would likely not be noticeable by our instruments.

— -

Let’s take a step back and look at the Black Hole proposal from a structural perspective. In the center of a Black Hole the idea is proposed that a gravitational singularity exists. One has to wrap one’s mind around this singularity having zero volume and yet containing all the mass of the Black Hole. Meanwhile, the singularity can be considered as having infinite density.

The problem is not that this is theoretically possible, but that it is physically possible. For one, infinity is not a self-based concept, but a mathematical path based on initial steps that — when prolonged — do not end in a specifically known outcome. The Black Hole model has all the qualities of a self-fulfilling prophecy; it is true because it was initially accepted as possible.

We started out with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and continued counting until forever. No one saw the mistake made at the beginning.

An apple halved comes to mind. If each part of a halved apple is halved again and each such part is halved yet again and this goes on and on, then we could end up slicing an apple in so many pieces that each person on this planet can be given a part of that one apple. After a survey, it is likely that no individual understood what was given to him or her. It shouldn’t be a surprise that the subject matter, the apple, vanished from sight likely well before 1,000 parts were created from it, let alone more than 7 billion parts.

The point of the halved apple is to show the unimportance of the individuated end results and how this can apparently be offset by the enormous magnitude of giving a single apple out to all that are alive, a magnificent singular global event. Anyone not in awe must have their mind examined and is most certainly not worth receiving anything from that apple at all. Infinity rules.

— -

The problems already began when starting from 1. We started with something single, made it go towards it max, and doing so resulted into something singularly peculiar.

Understanding the structure of number 1 lies at the heart of understanding the structural singularity. Number 1 is known to exist in three distinct numeral systems, even when one of them can hardly be called a system.

These three systems cannot be mixed. For instance, one cannot add a 2 to the binary system and this then being meaningful. Each system has different behavioral characteristics that cannot be placed inside the other systems.

Number 1 in the decimal system can be used in two distinct manners. It can be viewed as a distinct unit all by itself and, when additional units are considered, these units would receive a number simply based on their occurrence. This is the factual use for number 1, a single unit, one among equal units.

Number 1 in the decimal system can, however, also be viewed as representing the first, the winner, the best, the tallest, the shortest, or anything that proclaims first position in any larger but specific perspective. This is the empowered use for number 1. Notice how a winner automatically proclaims a number 2, 3, and so forth, not as equals.

Factual numbers and empowering numbers can coincide, but power is of course more powerful and can move the common positioning away from just the facts. More on this later. The decimal system shows us a dualistic behavior, most noticeable with number 1 that can be used in two distinct manners.

Note how the use of 1, portraying an overall perspective, like unity, is not part of the decimal system. Next to unity, there is no 2, 3, and so forth — only disunity.

— -

Number 1 in the binary system is not like the forms of 1 in the decimal system. Not a single 1 in the binary system can be considered first or best or shortest. While there is a starting point to write a first binary number, 1 is not the same as first, tallest, or best. Only when a binary code, say 11011001, is given the meaning of first will that specific meaning be expressed.

All uses of 1 in the binary system do not make any distinction among these 1s other than through positioning. Each 1 is basically the same and if so desired 1 can be described as ‘on’ in opposite to ‘off’, or ‘full’ in opposite to ‘empty’ — with the other position declared by number 0.

Both the decimal system and the binary system can be used to declare anything in our universe.

Lastly, there is an entire system made up by a single number 1. One should not even call it a system, even though it includes a perceived system. Consider words such as everything, the whole, and the universe, and a complete ‘system’ has been given a name. Next to the common naming of every single detail in life and of our universe, there is also the singular ‘system’ declaring the whole of it. That one all-encompassing word is itself depleted of any details but understood to contain all. We found ourselves therefore another singularity of enormous proportions. We can name everything in one word and this single whole does not contain nor behave like any of the parts.

— -

We prize unity above anything else. Mankind has learned that uniting is more beneficial than disagreeing and even the truth can get pushed a little out of the way to continue the hegemony of uniting ourselves to the extent possible.

— -

The word synergy needs to be mentioned here briefly. While no additional component is added, the word synergy indicates nevertheless that the overall outcome is distinct from the specific components. A house is the synergistic outcome of brick, wood, tile and glass. The word house is a distinct outcome that points not to the parts, but rather to the combination of the parts. All parts by themselves — not assembled — would not be a house.

— -

The list of words that can represent 1 using the singular system is short: everything, whole, universe, all. There are some words that belong to this system, too, even though they are specific: nature, life, mankind, god.

These words encapsulate — or can encapsulate — a complete reality. With nature this implies every living thing and its surroundings, while details themselves are not mentioned. With life this implies every living thing. With mankind this implies every human being ever alive. With god we get ourselves into some trouble, so it is left for a discussion some other time. Unity, too, is special in that it truly declares a system of 1, but its boundaries are fragile and often guarded.

Note how in the singular system, there are no clear distinctions that can be mentioned next to, for instance, everything; everything detailed is covered by that one word without pronouncing any details. Even the nothing, such as the hollow or the empty contents of a wallet, will be part of the enumeration covered with the word everything. The nothing that is truly nothing cannot change the enumeration covered by the word everything, yet it can be considered included (or excluded for that matter because the result is the same).

Let’s briefly build out that last remark. An empty wallet is not desired, but it is considered part of our common world. As such, it is a single event that can be enumerated with everything, even when all of us do our best to avoid it. The nothing that is truly nothing, however, is something our brain can capture, but it cannot really be placed as a single event on the list of everything. But it can get placed on the list of everything as a singularity. After all, it is something that does not behave like everything else.

Scientists call singularities those areas that cannot get captured in the usual scientific ways. Isn’t it surprising that few scientists have proposed that there may be nothing material inside a Black Hole at all? Like the empty wallet, it may be a spot all matter tries to avoid. Like a butterfly never making it to the Eye of the Storm.

— -

Originally, the natural numbers started out with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etcetera. Yet Peano made zero a natural number and, ever since, there are two mathematical groups that distinguish themselves around number zero: Number theorists (the largest and more common group) that focuses on the positive integers, and Set theorists that simply include zero as part of all natural numbers.

When discussing the Year Zero, most scientists take in the position that it does not exist. Interestingly, all pairs of subsequent years that end in a 5 have ten years between them — with one singular exception. Between January 1, 5 BCE and January 1, 5 CE only nine years are encountered. The lack of a Year Zero establishes a singularly unusual outcome.

When asked, most scientists reject zero as a fundamental number. When forced to concede that it is a fundamental number after all, only the tiniest steps towards conceding are provided. There is hardly a scientist that embraces zero as a fundamental aspect in nature.

— -

Matter converges with matter everywhere we look in our universe. Yet collectively, matter does the opposite. If matter diverges at the largest of levels, then that means the very first step was based on something fundamentally separating. What that something was is discussed further below. Yet for the decimal system, we have only one option to write it down:

Note how 1 is the second number in this version.

It is important to note that, when reviewing these numbers from an actual perspective, nothing changes. The zero does not represent anything material. Yet when reviewing these numbers from an empowered perspective, something extraordinary becomes visible. With zero, we have an actual position that is empty and that can be taken in by anything we want.

As an example, a throne can be viewed as just a chair, but it is also the symbol of power. As one can recognize with the saying the kind is dead — long live the king, it is not the person who is most vital, but the position in a larger established structure itself. A leader takes in a position that is not based on the individual’s body, but on the acceptance by all others as being ultimately superior compared to themselves. Power is a position that is given to whomever is first.

The choice to start the natural number definition with 0 includes the option to empower. We attach zero value to what we consider unimportant, while we can unite around a single person in a singular position next to all normal positions. Just like all materials for a house can built us a house, when viewed separately — unassembled — there is no house.

We have established empowered realities in our lives that are themselves not factual in nature: words, numbers, money, religion. No word can be the real thing; words only point to the real thing. Numbers tell us something about quantities, positions and structure, but you can’t have a beer with a 4 in a bar.

On top of all the factual details, we can have an empowered position that we then make real for all around. A throne is a highly-beneficial self-fulfilling prophecy. A king for king’s sake.

The empowered position is readily visible in the binary system. The meaning of 1101000111 can become anything we decide it to be. The factual combination of numbers is empty until we empower it with its meaning.

Lastly, the singular system once more. There is no zero in this system. The singular system has one number only, and that is number 1. Examples are the whole, the universe, everything. As soon as we break into the system, for instance, when saying almost everything, then we moved away from the singular system, almost unnoticed.

— -

If we accept that there is something inside a Black Hole, then we have accepted a singular situation to exist in an otherwise normal system. It is almost like saying: 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etcetera. The unusual part of this enumeration is then the doubling of the 1, with the first 1 representing the singularity incorrectly placed on top of zero.

Ordinarily, the singular person does not become king; he or she is more likely to become an outcast. But when everyone involved with power is preoccupied with their own role, the power structure itself may appoint the singular person as king.

— -

The solution is to acknowledge number zero as a fundamental number. If the condition at the centroid point of a galaxy needs to be whole, then number zero can be used to describe it. Only zero declares this position whole, because it means it is a very specific part of the whole, created by the whole.

In math, this is not news. It has been described already how approaching the zenith in which all comes together does not lead to a completed outcome. Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems tell us that there cannot be a (mathematical) system that ends up being complete onto itself.

With the event horizon, scientists have created a two-system reality for our universe, disguising it as a single system. Filling in the zero, two distinct 1s occupy the system as if both are natural components of that system.

— -

The Big Whisper Model

Lastly, the Big Whisper model that proposes a beginning to the materialization process based on the temporary lack of unification. One has to wrap one’s head around this because this sentence declares that matter is not the original energy; it declares that matter is a result and that the cause of matter, and therefore the ultimate explanation of matter, must be placed in a first position.

If we establish that first position with number 1, or even a potential number 1, then we already missed the correct calibration point. The first position must be declared with 0. The conundrum can be understood by declaring that this zero-position is based on the future creation of matter. The energy from which matter will ultimately derive must be presented as being zero in light of that future materialization.

Fortunately, this process did not involve a singularity. Rather, a transformation took place from an earlier energized state without matter to the current energized state with matter. Matter is not the original; it is a result.

Not many scientists are willing to bet their shirts with this position. They feel safer proposing a singularity from which matter derived than an invisible source that nevertheless was because we have the material outcome to prove that point.

Ultimately, this bring us back to the model of pressure.

In the Big Whisper model, the divergent outward motion as seen with all matter in the universe is used to propose an inward motion first — in the prior state when matter did not yet exist.

What had to occur is the temporary suspension of full-unification within the prior energized situation, leading to an outcome where unification is readily seen again in all material outcomes, except at that one singular overall level.

To proclaim this simplistically, there need to be two fundamentally distinct behaviors in the prior non-materialized state that established the conditions we see with matter in our universe. That is not as difficult as it appears.

If we call the prior state dark, then we can call the energy of that state dark energy. No other form of energy is proposed for the inward motion that would establish the Big Whisper and the subsequent material outcome.

Also, the inward motion must break the very fabric of dark energy, otherwise no other form of energy could get established. This means that the inward motion established the conflict as already presented with Zone 1 and Zone 2 in the pressure model, and that dark energy at the border (with Zone 2) was churned to the point the fabric got torn.

As soon as the inward motion experienced a breakdown, the separation we are after is a fact. Where all dark energy is involved in a single system, a secondary system is established of torn dark energy. The behavior of both Zone 1 and Zone 2 is not the same anymore and this interrupts the inward behavior. The shock breaks the inward motion and because there are no other regulations in place, the established tension is reversed.

All catapult outwardly.

The largest expansion is associated with Zone 1, so the biggest push within the catapulting action comes from Zone 1. Zones 2 and 3 are also highly tensed up, but in diminishing manners.

While on their outbound journey, pressures slowly start to diminish. When Zones 1 and 3 return to their non-pressurized states, they are back at what they started out with: as dark energy. One can propose Dark Matter for dark energy from Zone 1 to have been established, since pressure had been maximized in Zone 1. If need be, Dark Matter can be proposed to exist among all energy being catapulted outwardly.

When pressure finally let up for the torn dark energy of Zone 2, the quarks first appeared. While the damage had been sustained in the extreme pressurized Zone 1-Zone 2 border, the energy was not expressed fully until pressure had subsided. This needs to be understood well.

Inward dark energy must be recognized as spatially distinct. That what moved in also ended up moving out. The specific energy that ended up as Zone 2 originally arrived from a specific area, and on the catapulting outbound journey it would more or less be in the same position it originated from before pressure had returned to normal.

On the outbound journey in our early universe, however, this energy of Zone 2 would not be able to return to how it used to be. The damage would be expressed, and it is likely best to state that quarks are packages of damaged dark energy. There are only six distinct quarks so we can know that the sustained damage was not haphazard, but rather of limited distinctions.

Next, because the quarks are not the end result, we know that the quarks do not represent unification as desired by the damaged dark energy. The subatomic particles come into being, with neutron not having a charge and the proton having a charge.

Had neutrons been produced at full scale and nothing else, there could have been the option of a full return to dark energy. Yet the protons were also established, not by accident but as logical result of the experienced Big Whisper.

The proton is responsible for calling in the electron from Zones 1 and 3 (or just from Dark Matter). Proton and electron are:

— -

Sustained convergent action is seen in the universe at the local levels only. There is no collective behavior among all matter in our universe because separation occurred at the dark-energy level only once, just prior to materialization. With the catapulting action of the Big Whisper dark energy and damaged dark energy flew outwardly just the same and separation can therefore be considered the natural byproduct of the Big Whisper for matter and dark energy alike.

The chance for dark energy to maintain a universal connection is as slim as matter ever becoming a single mass. Only in fairy tales does everything end up in a happy ever after condition. That is actually the good part, because our Milky Way is then a self-sustained environment on an endless outbound journey, away from where our story began.

Matter, dark energy and Dark Matter established environments as large as galaxies that will not reconnect with all other matter and energy. The occasional combination of two galaxies does not change this reality of islands of energy floating through space forever.

We can find completion at the local levels, while there is an incompleteness at the overall level.

Structural Philosopher

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store