If energy conservation says all the mass and energy in the Cosmos can be neither created or destroyed, this would mean the Cosmos has always existed and will always exist. This fits in with the physics of Double Vortex Cosmology, where, like the massive galaxies, the cosmos on more vast scale would have the same general mode of operation, and the Milky Way and the earth would be at one of the (cosmic) jets, expansion of the jet would be what seems to be the expansion of the Cosmos in a sphere when actually the expansion would be just our area the cosmos that isn't round all the way round. The cosmos would have an infinite life because gravity would wind up the disk like the Milky Way and this would cause the expansion of the outward bound jets which would accelerate the mass and energy to the disk with the opposite ions of both jets combining at the cosmic belt with high energy to power the super energy of the most distant cosmic light houses seen, and my spin on this cosmology also would explain why they found recently that the "expansion of the cosmos" observed is speeding up in the outward expansion; when the opposite jets combine there would be more acceleration by way of the attraction of the ions as the matter and energy combined well. Vortex Cosmology of this type also allows energy conservation because it would be an eternal flow of the field, wound up and compressed by gravity and the expansion of the jets would allow the constant motion we observe without infinite expansion or contraction at any time. The expansion (of the jets) and contraction (of the disk) would be completely local (in the cosmic size range) and the balance of the expansion and contraction (except for how gravity would continually wind up the cosmos ) would exactly cancel, so energy is conserved in this view of cosmology.
-
COMPLETE DOUBLE VORTEX COSMOLOGY PHYSICS AND FALSIFIABLE PROOFS
It's thus not implausible or certainly not impossible the universe can be explained by way of energy conservation, and energy conservation has never failed in physics; the cosmos may have existed forever and will always exist. If the universe has existed forever this would solve the problem about how all the regularity of physics and life could be created out of nothing. If there was no time of creation, the universe was not created because creation would have a time before it when there was nothing, then more. Einstein said what's most incomprehensible about the universe is that it's comprehensible. But if meaning always came from other meaning like energy conservation where mass and energy always come from other mass and energy, then the meaning is not incomprehensible or from luck, and it's in much of what we see and hear! For the most part the cosmos would be a set of basic motifs from which all the rest is combined, but the motifs don't have to be absolute for life to do well. The main unexplained motif would be about how gravity continually winds up the field without winding down. Science has been more about how the cosmos works than why because how would be a motif from other motifs, not an absolute meaning caused by luck, with no explanation. Life labors well for thise who make the most of how life labors. While I'm not materialistic in life other than about science and machines, to be good at love and labor both are of worth.
-
It's thus not implausible or certainly not impossible the universe can be explained by way of energy conservation, and energy conservation has never failed in physics; the cosmos may have existed forever and will always exist. If the universe has existed forever this would solve the problem about how all the regularity of physics and life could be created out of nothing. If there was no time of creation, the universe was not created because creation would have a time before it when there was nothing, then more. Einstein said what's most incomprehensible about the universe is that it's comprehensible. But if meaning always came from other meaning like energy conservation where mass and energy always come from other mass and energy, then the meaning is not incomprehensible or from luck, and it's in much of what we see and hear! For the most part the cosmos would be a set of basic motifs from which all the rest is combined, but the motifs don't have to be absolute for life to do well. The main unexplained motif would be about how gravity continually winds up the field without winding down. Science has been more about how the cosmos works than why because how would be a motif from other motifs, not an absolute meaning caused by luck, with no explanation. Life labors well for thise who make the most of how life labors. While I'm not materialistic in life other than about science and machines, to be good at love and labor both are of worth.
-
