The Universe is grained

[Cerveny]

These grains are famous “God’s dice”. God does not play dice, God builds Universe from dice. Every time tick means new (local) dice layer is added. The Universe is being built, Universe grows. It is not important the dice’s sequence to the certain measure. (Variable time of neutrons decay did not cause any “butterfly effect” so far for example). But all has own limits. The higher dice tower, the less its stability, the less time of staying. If we deal with the Universe's surface area as with an energy equivalent, we got the quantum uncertainty: The higher energy excess the shorter time it’s lasting. If I am trying to found physical base of the “energy” phenomena I always get a Universe surface’s tension. As I am convinced that elementary particles are space structure’s defects, mentioned model matches it well.

[chaz wyman]

These grains are famous “God’s dice”. God does not play dice, God builds Universe from dice. Every time tick means new (local) dice layer is added. The Universe is being built, Universe grows. It is not important the dice’s sequence to the certain measure. (Variable time of neutrons decay did not cause any “butterfly effect” so far for example). But all has own limits. The higher dice tower, the less its stability, the less time of staying. If we deal with the Universe's surface area as with an energy equivalent, we got the quantum uncertainty: The higher energy excess the shorter time it’s lasting. If I am trying to found physical base of the “energy” phenomena I always get a Universe surface’s tension. As I am convinced that elementary particles are space structure’s defects, mentioned model matches it well.

But the amount of matter in the universe is static, so no new dice are being added.

[Cerveny]

These grains are famous “God’s dice”. God does not play dice, God builds Universe from dice. Every time tick means new (local) dice layer is added. The Universe is being built, Universe grows. It is not important the dice’s sequence to the certain measure. (Variable time of neutrons decay did not cause any “butterfly effect” so far for example). But all has own limits. The higher dice tower, the less its stability, the less time of staying. If we deal with the Universe's surface area as with an energy equivalent, we got the quantum uncertainty: The higher energy excess the shorter time it’s lasting. If I am trying to found physical base of the “energy” phenomena I always get a Universe surface’s tension. As I am convinced that elementary particles are space structure’s defects, mentioned model matches it well.

But the amount of matter in the universe is static, so no new dice are being added.

Since the "BB"? Do you believe the same physical laws pay in the most extreme matter's density? The matter, according the 2nd thermo dynamical law, should have been the mostly organized (ordered) at the beginning - nonsense - is not it?

[Arising_uk]

The GEO600 experiment may confirm Craig Hogans idea that the Universe has a 'holographic' 'grain'.

[thalarch]

The Berkenstein bound seems to hold that the information entropy in a physical system is finite, measured in bits -- that its density has a restriction. Suggesting that matter (space, whatever) can't be infinitely decomposed, there's a fundamental level of particles or information bits.

This should be expected if one was an advocate of physicalism, as I don't think infinity (as endless subdivision) makes any sense as a completed condition. And alternatively, if the bottom or "microphysical direction" was still continuously adding more details to itself similar to a fractal-like process, then it would become ridiculous to claim that our macrophysical stratum has its origin in an underlying substrate that will never even resolve itself. Infinite, potential decomposing becomes like a kind of computational idealism rather than physicalism, where "more virtual reality" is generated for any observers who breach "unexplored territories" that lacked cognitive agents or systems beforehand.

Asimov's quote below unintentionally rings more of Kant's internalisation of categories like causation (rather than their traditional treatment as mind-independent), wherein scientific measurements, research, and theoretical inferences involve the phenomenal world rather than literally breaking through to descriptions of a noumenal one. A scenario where the human operating system doled-out to each of us just keeps generating more underlying and overarching "origins" for commonsense appearances, endlessly.

Isaac Asimov: I believe that scientific knowledge has fractal properties; that no matter how much we learn, whatever is left, however small it may seem, is just as infinitely complex as the whole was to start with. That, I think, is the secret of the Universe.

[Cerveny]

Suppose unlimited structure of space. Suppose all elements of space are liable to the causality. All elements act to each other. From certain complexity no stable result of causality is possible. Causality can work by limited speed only. Perhaps some oscillations are possible. The pressure of the time is merciless. Causality is to release, to cast off semi-products, grains only. There is no time to learn more about structure of space. Time should have run more slowly...

[chaz wyman]

These grains are famous “God’s dice”. God does not play dice, God builds Universe from dice. Every time tick means new (local) dice layer is added. The Universe is being built, Universe grows. It is not important the dice’s sequence to the certain measure. (Variable time of neutrons decay did not cause any “butterfly effect” so far for example). But all has own limits. The higher dice tower, the less its stability, the less time of staying. If we deal with the Universe's surface area as with an energy equivalent, we got the quantum uncertainty: The higher energy excess the shorter time it’s lasting. If I am trying to found physical base of the “energy” phenomena I always get a Universe surface’s tension. As I am convinced that elementary particles are space structure’s defects, mentioned model matches it well.

But the amount of matter in the universe is static, so no new dice are being added.

Since the "BB"? Do you believe the same physical laws pay in the most extreme matter's density? The matter, according the 2nd thermo dynamical law, should have been the mostly organized (ordered) at the beginning - nonsense - is not it?

But this does not answer the problem.
Even if dense matter has its own trains of causlaity , does not indicate differnt law- just law acting according to circumstance, and there is still nothing to say that the amount of matter is not static.
But all these are speculations.

[Cerveny]

But this does not answer the problem.
Even if dense matter has its own trains of causlaity , does not indicate differnt law- just law acting according to circumstance, and there is still nothing to say that the amount of matter is not static.
But all these are speculations.

What are the difference between the less and the more "expanded" empty space by GTR? Can we measure it?

[chaz wyman]

But this does not answer the problem.
Even if dense matter has its own trains of causlaity , does not indicate differnt law- just law acting according to circumstance, and there is still nothing to say that the amount of matter is not static.
But all these are speculations.

What are the difference between the less and the more "expanded" empty space by GTR? Can we measure it?

In all seriousness I do not think they are empirically identifiable qualities, but abstractions to try to save appearances.
They are the epicycles of modern science.