What is the wavelength of... the universe?

That is the question I asked myself the other night. Is it a relevant question? Why not? Scientists postulate that the universe is but one of many and they can interfere with each other; much like a set of photon particle waves.

In order to determine this I thought of what variables we should consider. One of them would be possibly finding the average wavelength of every particle known. Perhaps they would share the same fluctuation. But then I realized that the average would change depending on the average temperature of the universe. Eventually the universe would cool to such a temperature that new particles would form and the ones we know now would be extinct.

Then I thought about the speed of light. And therein I believe lies the answer. Because the photon lies at the edge of the fourth dimensional universe. It has already seen the beginning of time and the end. Which is why I believe that the speed of light can change. But only from one universe to another. And the reason why is this:

The speed of light, the lifespan of the universe, and the amount of potential energy in the universe are directly related to each other. A universe that has more energy has a faster speed of light. This is because it takes longer for the universe to expend all of its energy to a zero point. And the potential energy is the amount of mass that has been excited times the amount of energy that has been transferred.

This is about where I left off. I have thought of a few sketches to help draw out the ideas behind this. I will try to post them later.

What do you guys think about this? Has this question been thought of before? Is there anything that could be applied to this that I missed or that has already been calculated?

The Schumann resonance is 7.83 MHz . That could very well be considered the wave length or frequency of earth. I also believe each planet and the sun omit different frequencies.

reply to post by Dynamike


Well, this is a very interesting question about a topic I've never thought of. With the multi-verse theory taking root and getting more proof, maybe each bubble universe has its own wavelength.

I actually read somewhere, I think in a magazine about the future, that they were saying that they could discover the wavelength/frequency of the universe but they'd have to build a particle accelerator as long as the circumference of the milky way galaxy......

But they said once they had that frequency they would be able to create matter and whatever they wanted....

It might have been popular mechanics or something similar.

That's all I can remember from my memory.

A very interesting question indeed. I believe that frequencies play an enormous role in the schematic of reality. The precise parameters of the relationship between frequencies and how an adjustment may cause a ripple...I couldn't tell you that. But I feel it is very, very important to investigate that line of questioning and see exactly how integral numbers are to the operation of reality itself. Numbers are just a translation of a fundamental function that enables the giant clock of the universe, much like these words are a translation of the raw impressions I am attempting to communicate.

And just like that example, words are only as effective as the person attempting to translate. The same goes for numbers...the numbers are never wrong, but the translating device may be flawed. Develop the perfect medium of translation, and the universe becomes an open book.

Hey OP,
I've been asking the question for years, deep in the subconscious it eventually erupted.

There are quite a number of sites that discuss this and claim to have devices that operate on the specific wavelength.

IF there is a way to create resonance with this wavelength, we could technically create energy from zero point

Originally posted by Dynamike
Which is why I believe that the speed of light can change. But only from one universe to another. And the reason why is this:

The speed of light, the lifespan of the universe, and the amount of potential energy in the universe are directly related to each other. A universe that has more energy has a faster speed of light.

The difference between science and religion is that science requires evidence.

If you don't have any, congratulations on your new religion, which is what I'm calling your belief in the speed of light not being constant, if you have no evidence to support it.

Now your idea that the speed of light may not be constant is something scientists have considered. They have not been able to find any evidence of this so far.

I also think the belief in other universes is somewhat of a religion if there is no evidence of other universes, and acquiring such evidence may be impossible (how can you observe something outside your universe?).

If you prefer science over religion, the frequency of the universe (CMB) has been studied in great detail and here is a graph of the frequency (on the horizontal axis):

Cosmic microwave background radiation

The graph shows a peak wavelength between 5 and 6 centimeters.

Does anyone in this thread have any understanding of what wavelength or frequency actually is? Really, people; technobabble in, technobabble out.

reply to post by Moduli


Its the holidays lol

Happens every year.

Hmmmm..... I'm looking at your replies, and the vastly separated nature of them, and going, Hmmmm......

Actually, frequeny via the naturally occurring bioelectromagnetic field is a very good question, even for armchair physicists. Check out the Teutonic Scale Thread, and then do some research.
Just sayin'
Tetra50

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Dynamike
Which is why I believe that the speed of light can change. But only from one universe to another. And the reason why is this:

The speed of light, the lifespan of the universe, and the amount of potential energy in the universe are directly related to each other. A universe that has more energy has a faster speed of light.

The difference between science and religion is that science requires evidence.

If you don't have any, congratulations on your new religion, which is what I'm calling your belief in the speed of light not being constant, if you have no evidence to support it.

Now your idea that the speed of light may not be constant is something scientists have considered. They have not been able to find any evidence of this so far.

I also think the belief in other universes is somewhat of a religion if there is no evidence of other universes, and acquiring such evidence may be impossible (how can you observe something outside your universe?).

If you prefer science over religion, the frequency of the universe (CMB) has been studied in great detail and here is a graph of the frequency (on the horizontal axis):

Cosmic microwave background radiation

The graph shows a peak wavelength between 5 and 6 centimeters.

edit on 4-9-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

Alright... Let's not get into semantics here. My 'beliefe' is not meaning a firm knowledge of the idea; but more of what scientists do, which is make an educated guess or estimation and then find the supporting clues to piece together and form a theory.

And the cosmic background is just radiation from the big bang. That is not the wavelength if the universe.

reply to post by Dynamike

Wouldn't the wavelength of the Universe be the same as the wavelength for time? and the Big Bang? Its totality being the wave front into the future. The energy gained by all the Suns and Black holes pulsating from the totality of the Universe. If it is a wave, then like any other wave it must pass through other Universes just as interference waves pass through each other .Then if it hits a wave front with the same frequency, it will cancel each other out. Or even if a part of the wave ,is cancelled out, then can this be called a ripple in time, and reality? until the wave joins up again..If the Paulo Alto Psy lab was right and all the "hits" occurred when Paulo Alto and the Earths local horizon was facing the Area of the Big bang! Then psy hits could be defined as ripples in reality, where telepathy and all the "telees" existed for a short time when there was a ripple in the wavefront.
Or is the area of the Big bang a Super Gigantic white Hole, pulsing the vibes out that appear to be matter, from another Universe, but as we know there is no such thing as matter only vibes. So does the White holes vibes have to compete with the growing vibes its already put out.Either way "i'll put harmonics on my to do list".

reply to post by Arbitrageur


That is just one frequencies among many in a resonant harmonic. Mircrowave radiation certainly is valid and tangible..but not alone.

The "frequency" of the universe would be a final output after you apply all resonant wavelengths. The "measurement' of it (if you call it that) would be either highly regional, and variant from the whole, or taken from outside the universe by measuring the ambient resonating frequency that come from it. Even then, there be more than one.

Even on Earth, the Schumann Frequencies....there are several.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

You don't get resonance in an open system. If the Universe is infinite there is no resonance.

If it isn't the only way to determine its resonant frequency (frequencies, with harmonic effects) is by knowing its limits and if there are reflection of signals from those limits. Good luck with that.

Hi rare-question fans.

What is the wavelength of... the universe?

The wavelength is the distance between the "peaks" or "lows".
| |

Originally posted by Phage
Good luck with that.

LOL.....the short answer.

Originally posted by Moduli
Does anyone in this thread have any understanding of what wavelength or frequency actually is? Really, people; technobabble in, technobabble out.

yes I do! in simple terms its a vibration think of when you toss a stone into a still lake and you watch the ripples come out from the center. Now when you see frequency on a monitor its represented by an up down motion each one up and down motion together would be one ripple from the center the next up down motion would be the next ripple. The up motion would be the beginning as it expands out in the lake, when the ripple hits the apex it then drops so the downward motion would be the ripple getting smaller and smaller until it isn't noticed anymore. the bigger the rock the bigger the ripple would equal a larger wavelength that lasts longer a smaller rock makes smaller waves shorter wavelengths and frequency would be how many and how fast the ripples come from the center.

The frequency of the universe will change due to attenuation normally space has no attenuation but at the outer shell of the whole universe frequency is still expanding the universe hence there is no way to see when the signal ends until the universe stops expanding

or to put it bluntly all they can do is guesstimate the frequency from the big bang by calculating how fast the universe is expanding to see when it will hit its apex.

The only thing im guessing that can slow the wavelength down is the nothingness on the other side but how much resistance does expansion put on the wavelength? that's the question

reply to post by C-JEAN


Thats what I thought too... and I think its pretty similar to the conclusion I have right now. Although its not finalized...


I am really sorry about the lack of detail. This is an extremely rough sketch I threw together right as I got home for work and I have to return very early.

But the ideas that have been playing through my head all day has a lot to do with space being curved. And I realized that both space and time are curved. They are curved around the speed of light. How do I know this? Because the closer an object gets to the speed of light, the faster it moves through time as well.

For instance, lets just say that all of the planets (and I will be using Pluto even though it is no longer a planet) move at the same speed. In reality they dont move at the same speed so this is the only thing I will change, their distance from the sun will remain the same for this example: Think of how long Pluto would take to revolve around the sun in a semicircle. And then think of how long it would take Mercury. It would only be a fraction of the time for Mercury because it is revolving closer to the sun. And it is the same for how I depicted objects moving through time or space in my drawing.

And to reiterate my statement in the OP; light does not experience time. For a photon the moment it leaves the surface of a star, to the moment it hits the retina of your eye as you gaze upon it at night, is an instant. And for the moment it escaped the big bang to the moment it will collapse into the fate of the universe- it is all one moment to the photon.

That is because time and space is not linear as we may think. It is just a singularity being stretched out. It is just a field being generated by a force. And in this field. This force. This is where I believe the speed of light, the frequency of the universe, and the amount of potential energy in the entire universe is being held- all in relation to one another.

So, when I propose that the speed of light increases then I also propose that the field has to increase because the energy has increased which means the amount of time for an object to go from 99.9% of the speed of light to 0 would be greater in this universe.

The speed of light is a constant in our universe. It is the only constant. It is a constant because it is a singularity. It resides as the barrier of time, which if the speed of light is a singularity, then time must also be.

The speed of light cannot increase without adding more energy or mass to the universe. It is impossible to add more energy or mass from within itself. Therefore I believe that the speed of light resonates the frequency of our universe, which may be the same or different from other universes which house more or less energy, and/or more or less mass.

The universe is a singularity that is a particle and a wave. It is a particle in the fifth dimension. It is a wave in the sixth.

Something to that effect for now.

Originally posted by Moduli
Does anyone in this thread have any understanding of what wavelength or frequency actually is? Really, people; technobabble in, technobabble out.

Well sure. A wavelength is where a particle can possibly be based upon its initial trajectory. The higher the wavelength the higher the probability it will be found. The frequency is the measure between the highest pitch of each wavelength.

That's just the idea in my terms. Correct me if I am wrong.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

You don't get resonance in an open system. If the Universe is infinite there is no resonance.

If it isn't the only way to determine its resonant frequency (frequencies, with harmonic effects) is by knowing its limits and if there are reflection of signals from those limits. Good luck with that.

edit on 9/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

wow sorry Phage didn't mean to take your idea because I just wrote to the one guy and the op in simple terms without seeing what you wrote but you super simplified it by breaking it down even smaller and less technical! My hat is off to you. You really know your stuff