For over one hundred years, visible physicists were convinced that the universe contained a duality of matter and empty space. A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE proclaims that there had never been any empty space. There had only ever been a singular visible infinite contrasting surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension always illuminated by one infinite form of finite non-surface light. What I meant by that was there must be an infinite number of stars, each one of which could emit a finite amount of non-surface light for a finite duration.
For almost one hundred years, visible physicists were convinced the universe was expanding through Einstein’s imaginary curved space/time, due to inaccurate information furnished by Edwin Hubble. Visible infinite surface cannot expand.
A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE refutes Einstein, refutes Hubble, refutes Hawking, refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the North American Space Agency, refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the Russian Space agency Roscosmos, and refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the China National Space Administration (CNSA)
For over one hundred years, visible physicists were convinced that the universe contained a duality of matter and empty space. A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE proclaims that there had never been any empty space. There had only ever been a singular visible infinite contrasting surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension always illuminated by one infinite form of finite non-surface light. What I meant by that was there must be an infinite number of stars, each one of which could emit a finite amount of non-surface light for a finite duration.
For almost one hundred years, visible physicists were convinced the universe was expanding through Einstein’s imaginary curved space/time, due to inaccurate information furnished by Edwin Hubble. Visible infinite surface cannot expand.
A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE refutes Einstein, refutes Hubble, refutes Hawking, refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the North American Space Agency, refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the Russian Space agency Roscosmos, and refutes all of the visible astrophysicists employed by the China National Space Administration (CNSA)
The first version of this essay was published online on the FQXi,org website on January 7, 2020 as an entrant in its ‘.Undecidability, Uncomputability, (sic) and Unpredictability Essay Contest
WHY CAN’T Y’ALL SEE THE ONE THING I SEE?
ABSTRACT
Every visible physicist who has ever lived has only ever been able to prove that only one real visible physical condition has ever existed. It is an irrefutable fact that all real matter – be it solid, liquid, plastic, vaporous, dark, animate or inanimate, symmetrical or asymmetrical - has always had a real visible surface. There has never been a physical duality consisting of finite visible matter swirling round in Einstein’s invisible curved space/time. There have never been three finite length, width and depth spatial dimensions. There has never been any invisible gravity, or any invisible Hawking’s imaginary black holes, and there was never a Georges Lemaître theoretical invisible violent big bang commencement of the real Universe 13.75 billion light years ago.
Obviously, Nature must have permanently provided this singular visible reality, which preceded visible humans’ appearances on visible Earth and will continue to exist forever after visible humans’ and the visible Earth’s extinction. The problem with science is that it is totally reliant on its visible adherent’s capability for making supposedly finite assumptions about an imaginary Universe supposedly containing vast amounts of invisible dark matter. They even try to make supposedly finite assumptions about each other’s supposedly finite assumptions. It is my hope that after reading my essay, you will see visible reality as I see it.
INTRODUCTION
Could a gang of visible modern physicists ever decide what kind of a visible computer they could build that would be capable of accurately predicting the future? Probably not: All modern visible physicists cannot even decide how many universes might exist, and a few of them are convinced that not even one real universe has ever existed. They are quite adamant about telling all who will listen that reality was only a rather comprehensive brainstorm being suffered in real time by some sort of invisible alien super-intellect.
After publishing his book, ‘Our Mathematical Universe,’ which was his admitted quest for the ultimate Nature of reality, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Max Tegmark has gone on to lecture about “Are there parallel (invisible) universes? How many different levels of (invisible) parallel universe could exist? Max Tegmark, Professor of Physics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, shares his views on the vastness of the (invisible) multiverse.”http://bit.ly/2W1CWFV. Could one of these invisible universes be discovered at any moment now by an invisible non-mathematician?
According to the FQXi.org Administration: “The theme for this Essay Contest is: Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability.”
Any normal visible person does not have to decide if visible reality exists. It is the only real condition that ever appears whether it is the constantly contrasting vista one sees when one’s eyes are open, or the calming blackness one sees when one’s eyes are closed. Dreams are always visible. Delusions caused by madness or drinks or drugs are always visible. Mirages are visible and even unidentified flying objects, and ghosts have reportedly been clearly seen by a few visible folks with better than average eyesight. Blackness is visible to those poor souls lying in abed in a coma.
One does not have to calculate how many visible realities have ever existed. There has only ever been one. Nor is there any urgency to determine what the official recommended amount of visible reality might be good for any visible person’s health. One visible person cannot finitely predict whether one is going to be able to not see at the time that person is visible.
After the finite question: “What is undecidability?” had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it elicited: “About 464,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.43 (finite) seconds) ” After the finite question: “What is uncomputability?” had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it produced: “About 83,200 (supposedly finite) results (0.43 (finite) seconds)” And after the visible finite Google Search Engine had been queried about: “What is unpredictability?” It responded with: “About 6,460,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.42 (finite) seconds)
Even though visible modern physicists have used visible digital and quantum computers to try to locate unknown mathematical variants, they will never do so. Both visible digital and quantum computers have visible circuits and silicon chips internally installed, but as a visible digital computer has never found an unknown mathematical variant using visible digital input, a visible quantum computer is unlikely to find one by searching with invisible qubits. An unnatural finite invisible unknown condition could never exist in a visible infinity.
ASK ME NO QUESTIONS I’LL TELL YOU NO LIES
The 2020 FQXi.org Grant program is titled: ‘Consciousness in the Physical World.’ The Administrator announcing the Grant has helpingly furnished carefully crafted scientific questions that Grant procurement researchers might take a shot at answering if they hope to get any Grant money.
I have listed these finite sample questions as they were written. I have then rephrased them so as to make the questions and my answers understandable to normal folks. After the first finite example question: “Can we usefully break down consciousness into components and relate these to the physical world?" had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it elicited: “About 3,160,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.81 (finite) seconds)” The question as put is imprecise. When the edited finite question: “Can imaginary we usefully break down invisible imaginary human consciousness into imaginary components, and relate them to the imaginary physical world?” was entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it provided: “About 241,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.92 (finite) seconds)” But every visible physicist who has ever lived has only ever been able to prove that only the singular component of matter, whether it be solid, liquid, vaporous, plasmatic, dark, animate or inanimate, symmetrical or asymmetrical has a visible surface. “Is there a theoretical — and preferably mathematical — framework that can in principle determine which physical systems will be associated with consciousness and which will not?” was the second example finite question, and after this had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it elicited: “About 1,290,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.80 (finite) seconds)” Here again, the question lacks precision. After it had been edited to read: “Was there an imaginary humanly devised theoretical—and preferably mathematical—framework that could in principle determine which physical system would be associated with invisible imaginary human consciousness?” had been submitted into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it produced: “About 49,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.80 (finite) seconds)” Nature eternally provided one real system for showing one visible framework. The third example finite question reads: “What — exactly, and with as much rigor as possible — is the connection between quantum mechanics and consciousness?” and after it was entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it elicited: “About 476,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.45 (finite) seconds)” The supposedly finite question is utterly incomprehensible. Real naturally provided visibility could never be inexact. However, after the edited question: “What — exactly and with as much imaginary vigor possible — was the imaginary connection between humanly contrived invisible quantum mechanics and imaginary invisible human consciousness?” had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it produced: “About 18,700 (supposedly finite) results (0.75 (finite) seconds)” Natural visible reality has never been connected to anything. Example finite question four reads:” What are the roles of indexical information, which is information connected with the particular subjective viewpoint of the universe an agent has, in cosmology and fundamental physics?” and after this enigmatic codswallop had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine, it brought forth: “About 23,300 (supposedly finite) results (0.23 (finite) seconds)” The reality provided by Nature only has the single role of being visible. After the far more sensible edited example question: “What are the imaginary roles of indexical information, which is information connected with a particular imaginary human subjective viewpoint of an imaginary universe an imaginary agent had, in imaginary cosmology and fundamental imaginary physics?” had been put into the finite visible Google Search Engine, it fired back: “About 10,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.90 (finite) seconds)” The fifth example finite question reads: “What are the necessary, and what are the contingent, links between consciousness and other mental qualities/processes such as choice and agency, intelligence, feelings and emotions, moral weight, “free will” and responsibility, etc.?” had been entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine the figure of: “About 174,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.87 (finite) seconds)” popped up on screen. This finite question was edited to read: “What are the necessary, and what are the imaginary contingent, links between imaginary invisible human consciousness and other imaginary invisible human mental qualities/processes such as imaginary human choice and agency, imaginary invisible human intelligence, abstract human feelings and emotions, imaginary invisible human moral weight, imaginary human invisible “free will” and imaginary human responsibility?” It was then entered into the visible finite Google Search Engine it elicited: “About 856,000 (supposedly finite) results (1.19 (finite) seconds)” Natural visible reality has never been linked to any other real physical condition. All real people stay visible while they are alive, and if their bodies are skillfully preserved by visible adept preservationists after they go toes up, their corpses too can remain visible for quite a spell. Even their visible ashes can be kept in visible urns until whoever is keeping the urn forgets why they are doing so and replaces the ashes with a bunch of visible freshly cut flowers.
Example finite question six is mercifully short and reads. “How do we better study consciousness in humans?” This elicited: “About 148,000,000 (supposedly finite) results (0.54 (finite) seconds)" Its edited version of: “How can imaginary we better study invisible imaginary consciousness in imaginary humans?” produced: “About 14,200,000 results (0.83 seconds)” after it had been entered into the finite visible Google Search Engine. Although visible scientists firmly believe that their supposedly finite capability to study practically anybody fortuitously corresponds to enough compliant visible people who willingly agree to be studied so as to make the venture profitable, Nature made sure that only one singular visible reality that need never to be studied, could be dealt with by all humans from womb to tomb would always prevail.
The final finite example question reads: “How do we study consciousness outside of humans?” This finite question was entered into the finite visible Google Search Engine and it elicited: “About 98,400,000 *supposedly finite) results (0.68 (finite) seconds)” The re-phrased question: “Has there ever been a need for any sensible person to find out if cats could have any amount of invisible intelligence?” had been submitted into the finite visible Google Search Engine, the depressing answer: “About 5,030,000 *supposedly finite) results (1.36 (finite) seconds)” appeared on screen.
After the finite question: “How many visible doohickeys were present in Lithuania in the 13th century?” was carefully entered into the finite visible Google Search Engine, it almost instantly replied: “About 3 (supposedly finite) results (0.60 (finite) seconds)” The same answer was displayed on screen when the finite question: “How many invisible doohickeys were present in Lithuania in the 13th century?” had been inserted into the finite visible Google Search Engine.
CONCLUSION
Although each visible person has always had a finite pair of eyeballs, each visible person will only ever see for all of their visible lives an infinite plethora of contrasting visible scenery no matter in which direction they look, and no matter if they look through spectacles, or a telescope, or a microscope, or binoculars or a monocle. A visible camera can only take photographs of contrasting vistas. Visible Mathematicians will only ever discover that there was an infinite number of supposedly finite numbers. Any finite number can have an infinite number of finite fractions or decimals. While visible everyone sincerely believes that the shortest finite distance between two finite fixed visible points is a finite visible straight line, it is worth my pointing out that the furthest distance two finite fixed points could be placed apart would have to be an infinite straight line. Of course, there are no fixed points. Natural visible reality has no separable finite points. While visible scientists claim to be able to accurately measure time, time is simply an invisible idea. There are an infinite number of visible timepieces no two of which can maintain identical synchronization. Official American time is the average mean registration of the fifty-seven visible cesium atomic clocks monitored by the United States Naval Observatory in Washington DC. The strange thing about an atomic clock is that usually before it goes on line, a government spokesman appears and claims that this atomic clock will keep perfect time for hundreds of years. Then, about a week or so after the atomic clock has been activated, another government spokesman appears and announces that a leap-second must be inserted into all of the atomic clocks presently operational.There are an infinite number of times any visible timepiece could be stopped and restarted. Visible modern physicists insist that their idea of a finite universe exists in finite measurable time and they have the ability to measure the duration of stars and planets and comets and so on. But Nature only provided one infinite visible Universe. When a visible normal person looks upward on a clear night, he or she will notice the bright surface of the moon and stars contrasted with the black surface of the sky. The visible black surface of the sky could not be “older” or “younger” than that of the moon and the stars was for it would then be impossible for any visible person to see them simultaneously. The visible light blue surface of a clear summer’s day sky could not be “older” or “younger” than that of the visible surface of the sun was.
While visible men seem to have constructed finite visible buildings, there is an infinite way visible building could be constructed. There is an infinite number of ways to construct finite visible technology. An infinite number of finite visible fiction and non-fiction books have been published. The visible members of the American government have managed over the years to turn the visible vaunted finite written American Constitution into an infinite number of Federal Laws all finitely kept in visible law books.
Nature permanently provided only one infinite visible realty. It is infinite in shape and size and duration.
ONE UNIVERSAL TRUTH
There has only ever been, and there will only ever continue to be ONE unified INFINITE contrasting visible surface eternally occurring in ONE INFINITE dimension while always mostly being illuminated by ONE INFINITE sort of finite non-surface light. By that I mean that there is an infinite number of stars each one of which can produce a finite amount of finite non-surface light for a finite duration.
A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE by Joe Fisher aims to dismantle the ideas held on the visible universe through a philosophical critique on empirical research. This book provides a collection of essays and articles written over the years and submitted to various essay contests and journals that come together to argue against the ideas that were put in place by names you're probably quite familiar with: Einstein, Hawking, NASA, CNSA, and more. With examinations on past experiments and reflections on commonly accepted theories, A NEW THEORY OF THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE aims to dismantle the idea of an expanding universe and attempts to prove that the visible infinite surface cannot expand.
First, although this book does make interesting claims and does point out important discrepancies, the lack of true original research with data makes it hard for the claims to hold scientifically. For example, this book makes it clear that many past experiments were purely thought experiments, or "imaginary." While this is a very important distinction to someone new to the field or just a casual reader, these theories have still held strong despite the "imaginary" aspect. Thus, it places a larger than reasonable importance on these aspects in order to refute the claims of Hawking and Einstein without any true research done that could reasonably defend the claims made.
In addition, the overall writing and formatting of this book make it a fair amount more difficult to read. This book is a collection of essays and articles, so there frequently is repetition, and the flow between ideas can be hard to follow at times. The writing is also not clear or easily read when it comes to being able to genuinely explain these complex topics, making it difficult if you lack background in the subject of space science. Overall, the topic of the universe is already quite complicated, so a book needs to be very well written and edited in order for it to truly make a difference or to be understandable to the general public, and unfortunately,this book does not achieve this.
Ultimately, while this book features unique claims and does point out important aspects of research the general public may be less aware of or knowledgeable about, the formatting, writing, and lack of true data to back up claims made this book less impactful. While the ideas and theories this book contains may turn out to be true in the long run, the lack of data and authentic research to support the contentions make it difficult to truly take this book as a serious refutation of all the previously accepted data made by legitimate scientists and national research programs.