T h e   U n i v e r s e

I believe we proceed from a false assumption. The pillars of our reality are Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. Quantum Mechanics makes accurate predictions about the sub-atomic, but is inadequate when describing anything macroscopic. General Relativity predicts the macroscopic, but fails at the sub-atomic. I believe the reason we have been unable to reconcile these two systems is because, deep down, we cling to unspoken ideologies. These ideologies tell us what we are supposed to be looking for and how we are supposed to look. To paraphrase a line out of The Matrix, "It takes no special talent to think outside the box. All one need do is recognize the truth. There is no box."

The currencies of our universe are matter, energy, time and space. These are the fundamental components we seek to understand. It is what we, ourselves, are made of, and it is the behavior of these components that we strive to predict. For the most part, we've been very successful, except for a few details. We understand the relationships between matter, energy, time and space quite well. Our equations make useful and consistent predictions. Our science has produced some amazing discoveries and useful tools. But just because we are able to do these things does not mean that we have an understanding of the underlying principle. We don't. We know we don't because neither Quantum Mechanics nor General Relativity give us complete answers.

On the largest scale, the universe appears as a vast filament structure made up of galactic clusters. Between these filaments is, for lack of a better word, nothing. These filaments appear to surround large volumes of empty space. So how could a homogenous expanding mass turn into the fine mesh we see today? Perhaps it didn't.