I was curious about one of the premises of Physics. The old statement: for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction.

Is this still valid in Physics?

And if so...would it not mean that the opposite of the state of nothing..no time..and so on - is totality...all time and all possibilites fulfilled?

Off course, nothing isn't an action...but it may have implications as being a state that brings about its opposite state...Everything Possible.

Then in between these two ends ...or beginnings..or absolutes...would we have a progression of relativity?


If so, then would that mean that nothing itself is inseperate from Everything...
and perfect knowledge exists in a static and eternal state fully fulfilled from the implication of Every Possible Outcome?

you missread the principle. Its every ACTION has an equal and oposite reaction. It refers to forces nothing else. If i push on a wall the wall pushes back, if i give you a $100 there is no universal law that means you will give me $100 back

No.

The principle only works on macroscopic levels. On the subatomic level, not everything works by cause and effects.

''And if so...would it not mean that the opposite of the state of nothing..no time..and so on - is totality...all time and all possibilites fulfilled?''


Here you are certainly right. If we extrapolate our existences down to subatomic levels, then this line holds true.

Reiku

no it doesnt, I could say that the oposite of everything was god, chocolate iced cream or the disc world and that would make as much sence as that statement.

we dont KNOW what is possable (we are a product of THIS univese and ONLY this universe). We cant even DEFINE nothing, how are we going to assume that the oposite of whatever nothing is is THIS

Then let us associate colors with codes.

that went straight over my head i hate to say:(

Also... to say we are a product of this universe only, is a falsifiable theory, against the multiverse theory...

An electron for instence, is shared among many universes... collectively, you can say from this interpetation that possibly it extends into infinity = 00

Also... to say we are a product of this universe only, is a falsifiable theory, against the multiverse theory...

An electron for instence, is shared among many universes... collectively, you can say from this interpetation that possibly it extends into infinity = 00

Says who ? That is an unfounded assumption.. not science.

I am very let down with the lack of physics around here:

Everette showed us that the universe could be an infinite amount among many: Not only this, but he showed us that a single particle is in a dizzy infinite among an infinite amount of universes.

Not that i agree with the theory. For reference.

I am very let down with the lack of physics around here:

Not that i agree with the theory. For reference.

:confused:

Look they observe these particles disappearing.. nothing more. They assume that they move between universes. It is unfalsifiable and thus not science.
Or am I unaware of any evidence supporting this assumption ?

If they disappear, then they ''tunnel'' through time and space.

That is self-constistent, in the theory that one universe is enough.

Right.. so why do we need multiple universes ?

Only because of situations... these ''things'' happen inherently, and yet, the math predicts them... BUT

There is one theory saying that one universe is certainly enough.

Only because of situations... these ''things'' happen inherently, and yet, the math predicts them... BUT

There is one theory saying that one universe is certainly enough.

I don't know what you're saying.. please explain again ?