PSI Blog 20210208 Finite Laws in an Infinite Universe
Thanks to my most dedicated reviewer of Infinite Universe Theory, Abhishek Chakravartty, who did the math and concluded:
"So, when acceleration is not constant, Newton’s second law is not applicable."
Right. Each law of nature is applicable to an assumed finite number of conditions. In this case, F=ma of Newton's Second Law of Motion only applies to one collision. That single collision is what we call a "cause." In the Infinite Universe this never really applies completely (as with all laws in physics). Any colliding microcosm[1] must do so within a macrocosm[2] containing an infinity of supermicrocosms (the microcosms within the environment).
Newton’s First Law of Motion is similarly idealistic. The microcosm stays in motion only if space is perfectly empty (Newton’s agnostical “unless”). Because space is not empty, the law fails as it travels through the macrocosm filled with an infinity of supermicrocosms. Nonetheless, it has been called the "law of the universe." It is good enough for us to see how the universe works.
The beauty of Infinite Universe Theory is that a "first cause" is unnecessary, in tune with the Fifth Assumption of Science, conservation (Matter and the motion of matter can be neither created nor destroyed). With our assumed infinity, there is always yet another microcosm around to accelerate any sluggish microcosm. Thus, everything in the universe is always in motion. While each event requires collisions, the universe "itself" does not. That is yet another reason any finite universe theory, like the Big Bang, eventually will fail. It also is why the Big Bang Theory is presently so popular among religious folks who tend to believe in an imagined "first cause" and in Einstein's "perfectly empty space" (i.e., "nonexistence").[3] For that reason Infinite Universe Theory will receive only grudging acceptance. The switch from finity to infinity has global philosophical as well as cosmological implications. Once established, there will be no turning back. That is why we call it the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”
[1] MICROCOSM. An xyz portion of the universe surrounded by an equally important environment called a macrocosm. Note that in conventional science microcosms are referred to as systems, which generally are considered more important than the environments in which they exist. In Infinite Universe Theory, microcosms cannot exist without their equally important macrocosms. Regardless of the immensity of a microcosm, in an Infinite Universe an infinitely large macrocosm still surrounds it. The boundaries of a system sometimes are obvious: An apple, for instance, has a skin that roughly distinguishes it from its surroundings. At other times, the boundaries are not so obvious: A bee colony, for instance, has rather obscure boundaries when many of its members are far afield gathering nectar. Boundary selection is often difficult, always important, and frequently arbitrary. As scientists, we try to reduce arbitrariness by recording the location of boundaries with as much accuracy as possible. Our designation of a particular xyz portion of the universe as a microcosm faces the same problems, although in that instance, we treat its environment (the associated macrocosm) as equally important. Also, by attempting to treat the microcosm and the macrocosm equally, we are not as likely to miss important factors, as we would if we were biased toward one or the other (Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, p. 319 [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook]).
[2] MACROCOSM. The environment of a microcosm. Strictly speaking, the macrocosm contains the rest of the infinite universe. Practically speaking, only the nearby portions of the universe generally have much influence on a particular microcosm (Ibid, p. 317).
[3] Borchardt, Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk].