Even the atoms themselves are said to be mostly space within their effective radius. Well I propose an inverted space-mass universe. A universe where it is the mass that dominates. Come to think of it, isn't that what we supposedly had earlier, but it popped like a popcorn?
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 5 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,234,813
Have you read Issac assimov's "the gods themselves"? It deals with a parallel universe where the strong and weak nuclear forces are somehow reversed yet somewhat stable. Idk if the science behind that is sound but it's a great sci-fi read
Specious Niggling Effulgence joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,234,847
actually, look into Julian Barbour and the "Janus Point" which is another theoretical interpretation of the universe, and tbh, it's not far off from what you're suggesting, op. there are some differences, and his is more robustly underpinned by mathematical models and stuff, but the high-level, non-mathy explanation of it is approachable. it's really, really short on experimental observations and may just be entirely beside the point -why bother proposng the opposite is actually what's true if the outcome is the identical observation of reality? this was the same reason Richard Feynman abandoned the idea of backwards time moving positions, like, "yes" hypothetically that's true, but nothing changes if you just assume they are the same as electrons moving forwards in time. they are opposites, and distinct, assuming they are the same, yet one is time-reversed literally leads to no new understanding of it. so it doesn't matter. call it 6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other and collect your nobel prize and move on.
but it's still fun to speculate. and negative mass in barbours theory is a fun concept to run with. literally. you'll get the joke if you look into it, but it's more like a pun than a joke anyway.
Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,234,888
@1,234,829 (B)
I don't think I've read that one, but Ill look it up. I feel like I might have read foundation and return, but it's been a while. I rammed through a lot of Asimov books in a row and have a bad habit of reading books like junk food. I enjoy it in the moment but it takes repeated intake to leave a mark
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 8 hours later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,234,911
@previous (E)
A common theme in his work is if we found an alien intelligence, would we know what to make of it? Would it even be clear to us that it's "alive"? Two of my favorites are "Solaris" and "His Master's Voice".