Structure Of The Universe or How to Make Your Brain Hurt

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


What is the structure of the universe? Scientists are now fairly confident that it’s not simply duct tape and money that holds it all together and so modern-day physicists have been working dutifully to answer this cosmic question for quite some time now, as have I.

I am at an advantage compared with other people as far as contemplating solutions to complex scientific problems goes—I have an unfathomable amount of time each week that I can dedicate to lay-person research and abstract thought-experimentation. Surely it is not everyone’s luxury to have the freedom to ponder, at length, such age-old questions as, “What came first, the chicken or the egg?” or, “Where did the universe come from?” while simultaneously watching every single science show that Dish Network broadcasts.

Recent research suggest that dark matter in our universe may form a lattice – grid – scaffold – type structure that branches out like the veins of a tree leaf, which then enables regular matter to form, thus creating the visible universe we know and love today. And we already know that there are elements in our universe that are fundamental, without which the rest of everything else can’t happen. For example, there are chemical elements, like those displayed in the Periodic Table of the Elements on the science classroom wall; there are classical elements, as identified by the Greeks as Earth, Air, Fire and Water; and there are elemental forces, like good ole Murphy’s Law of probabilities.

Everything else that exists or happens in the universe builds upon the fundamentals of the elements. Without Terra Firma, air, fire, and water, life does not seem to be able to exist in our universe. Without the fundamental chemical particles there would be no land, no water, and no oxygen. And without the fundamental forces of electromagnetism, the strong force, the weak force and gravity, there would be no planetary systems with all that incessant spinning and constant movement, which seems to be another fundamental component necessary for existence.

So what useful tidbit can we gain from all these facts? What may be an important link to understanding the nature and mathematics of the universe involves taking into consideration inherent, fundamental properties; in particular one really, really big one that scientist may not have factored in into all their mathematical formulas yet: That our Universe is a duality; that it is one of two—that maybe Universes come in pairs.
I don’t know if scientists are aware that what may be missing from their calculations for a Unified Equation of Everything, is taking into account that absolutely every time one thing comes into being, two things come into being. Inherent Duality may be a fundamental element of the Universe.

On Earth, we certainly experience a fundamental dualism with just about everything, right? In/out; right/wrong; conservative/liberal; privatization/socialization; male/female; traditional/exploratory; one side/the other side, yin/yang—the list is endless and many of the examples are profound. Things like Micro/Macro, and how fractals are the same patterns whether at the biggest Macro level or the tiniest Micro. That’s cosmic stuff.

Physicists already know that when one particle comes into existence it can be in two states or places at once and yet, so far, science has been unable to predict with accuracy which one place it will end up. I think this applies to certain individuals we all know, too, but I’m not naming names. But the reason there is always two potential extreme endpoints, if you will, is because everything happens along a scale between two states or two places of being, and that space in between interacts with time and forces, creating probability and eventual outcome. This is how computers operate, storing logic states of 1 or 0 in registers, based on data-information ‘forces.’ Even human beliefs fall across a wide spectrum from far–leaning one way to far–leaning toward the exact opposite opinion on the other side, and everywhere along the continuum.

This structure of two opposition states – connected by a chord of time, forces and probability, happens at the smallest levels of the universe as strings, in string theory, and also at the largest scale, as in the case of “universes.”

It was mentioned on a science program recently that one theory about gravity is that the reason it is so weak of a force in our universe is because we don’t have very much of it – compared to the magnitude that has been calculated for how much gravity would have existed during the Big Bang; and that there may be just a little trickle of it always filtering into our universe from somewhere else.

So maybe there are always two universes; one filled with matter and dark matter—the visible universe that we see and inhabit, and another universe—one that has all the anti-matter that was necessary to make the Big Bang explosion.
Perhaps it requires a lot of gravity to contain the anti-matter, which could explain why the vast majority of the total force of gravity is not found in our universe, as has been theorized by minds much greater than my own.

Perhaps the reason there is a chord of gravity (if there is one) that siphons from that one Universe into ours, is to enable a mechanism that allows for the two universes to maintain distance from each other, so as to not run into each other. Because that spells trouble for both universes, you know, and us in particular, since when those two universes collide, anti–matter accidentally touches matter and we get a new Big Bang, which starts the process over again.

This is a radical theory, but a lot of it is based on what theoretical physicists are already talking about and proving mathematically, like string theory and membrane universes and that there is not really ever a single point, but rather two places something can be every time you do the math.

So what might be being left out of the grand equation of the universe that physicists are looking for may simply be the other universe. If it were presumed to exist, and if the theory is correct, then it should fit very neatly into the mathematical equations of our universe.

Now this is where I must step aside, since we are going to need to call in some geniuses to apply the mathematical concepts. If scientists haven’t already started calculating the inherent duality of the universe into their “Unified Theory of the Everything” equations, perhaps they will start now.


  1. A very good article. I have been working on same kind of a fundamental dualism. Unfortunately only in Finnish. I let you know if and when I) write in English, if you are not eager to learn our beautiful language.

    Best Wishes.

    Timo Karjalainen

Speak Your Mind