Standard Model Excludes Fractal Universe

I came across this video about how a graduate student took a survey of the sky and determined that the universe is smooth or uniform, not clustered or fractal, at very large scales.



I found it on an astronomy site as the first hit that come up when I typed into google "how did we get the really big picture of the universe". I watched it but didn't understand it too well except that I was really confused by what she said at the end since I'd been expecting her to say the universe was clustered. The third hit was from ScienceDaily.com and I read it with interest. It's very interesting and I wonder if I'm the only one that disagrees with their conclusion.

Apparently, for the standard model to be valid right now as a basis for predicting material movements, we must assume that matter becomes smooth on the very large levels. If matter doesn't become smooth and instead continues to be clustered, then there will have to be some major rewriting of the laws of physics.

Is this image clustered or uniform? Here's the sciencedaily article about it Big Picture of the Universe Confirmed

If I assume that I have an invisible 1 ready for use whenever and wherever I want, then are my quotations

1+1=3

or

2+1=4

correct

So you see, everything in the science that requires assuming in order to prove something mathematicaly or physicaly, can(t) be correct.

Where's the truth?

IMO, the truth is that we as humans with all our "science" based proofs will never, never be able to completely examine the "reality" we're actualy dwelling in. This is not why we're here for, this is not our job and this is definitely not (GOD)given to us.

As soon as "they" assume that 96% of the visible universe is an INVISIBLE black matter, which properties "they" still can't determine, we will be witnesses of such "scientific" postulates and "proved" quotations (with all due respect to Einstein).

Due to the fact that they will never ever be able to find out why and how one parcticle (which we're able to experimentaly observe) can just switch between both wave and linear structure and hereby, for that particular "time", vanish from our observation field, we will also be witnesses of their (scientists) "quest" to find out the "smallest" or GOD particle.

But in a fractal universe, one also MUST assume that there are an endless possibilites of "small" and "big". So where is the end ~~~~~ ?????


Not that I am able to prove it otherway or anyway...but...the "key word" is assume, and everything is possible.

Much respect
Mall...

I like how you think.

I agree that in a fractal world the possibilities are endless.

I think that this conclusion may seem scary to a lot of people, but at the same time it is immensely empowering.

Do you think the picture displayed is contradictory to "science's" conclusion which states that the universe is smooth at the MACRO levels?
(as per the standard model)

U Crazee dude painted a more than crazee normal,
this greenish electrical uniform hides the cluster of invisible spectra!!!

I assume that we have to learn omnisience of Loove to loose
this parasitic hypnotic agenda of modern paid sciences...
Well, even by using the numbermagix on sick speculative BS -
i get 1+1=n (or n-elevated-n) but never 3. Anyhow there is a
nice twinker in the unseen particle:
Here the truth again - hahahahahah

This max refraction of a molecule clearly shows us the vibe,
oscillating shakti offering a form as desired,
shifting left/right in/out from nonlocal nonexcisting particledogma,
pure energy caught up in the loops of dimensionality,
standing lightwaves shifting under the onslaught of the "neutral" observer/MF, ect...

Just follow the energy! - and the form will change??? This could be the bridge...

But if that Me/allthatsit/singularity another particle, again just an assumed vibe
of oscillating mind without insurance policy, assorted collection of wishfool thinking
fullfilled by divineShakti.

And Lady Brook, lets get it clear, the omnidirectional creation has time/timelines as sideeffect,
so there are flaws in just making it bidirectional.
Experiment: Send some affirmative motivational Loovecluster back to yourself as kid,
calling up the inner awareness. Than contact your futureself to ask forguidance...
Than get some inspiration what would "help" your personality type mostly!!! Apply those
sweets onidirectional to all enemy & invisible parallelselfs to start the giving. Than recieve
and see yourself, that it is not only bidirectional!!!
Than purely scientific - i have clearly shown to this realm, that we allready function
in a divine paradigm of fractal dynamix

To all mechanic hypnotiseurs then - we wont follow your repetitiv burying out dead bodies/mental constructs to put them on our table... drop them outside
the shock and the many years of hypnotic indoctrination may be your excuses
How about Holo-computed modellation? Would that benefit the flow or make it a nicer cage??

In the original Shakti hangs on Krishnas hips/tights, eager to please him and giving
any of his flunkers and ideas a form, without delay or time even involved! No notion of
usefoolness to creation!!! Just Looveplay!! Pleasing! Get this...

And Lady Brook, lets get it clear, the omnidirectional creation has time/timelines as sideeffect,
so there are flaws in just making it bidirectional.

If one continues to presume my directional basis of theory one should be patient to understand exactly where that direction leads.

Political factions in the Scientific community are ever present....just ask Uncle Jack who was in the "thick of it".

http://vimeo.com/12143189

Presuming you understand where I'm leading with what I post is a grave error. It's not my faction...not my politics. But non the less ever present. You shall however see where I am leading with this train of thought in a very short time....time ...time.....thanks to a Snitch in time.



Testing times Arrow:

http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.pdf

http://www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/136

For what it's worth.....something's going down

So i cant follow your repetitiv burying out dead bodies/mental constructs to put them on my tables...

"Your" tables....??

Then don't follow....

Oooopps... forgive me imageningdining with U and having parallel smaltalk, not paralized rethoric,
aka ethnic cleansing on scientific mediums like Jack points out....

So i cant follow your (I didnt mean you here, Brook)repetitiv burying out dead bodies/mental constructs to put them on my tables...
"Your" tables....?? Then don't follow....

Thats funy, dont follow the strangers putting dead bodies onyour table

Ok, i sold the house incl. the scientific evidence and went on an Arrow (i nearly liked this new TVserial)
onto a parallel reality.

Brook wrote:Just a brief note:

I've contacted a physicist today who is good friends with Tamara Davis about this article. I will bring his insights when I receive them.

Cool! It's amazing how things like this happen on the internet

Thanks for posting that primary research too. It's always nice to have the most complete data available even if I can barely understand it in that form