This document describes thought experiment 6
The thought experiment is called : The behaviour of fishes

The reason of this experiment to place yourself in a different "world" and to see if it matches with our own experience i.e. with our reality. If it does not then you can ask your self the question: does our own experience match with the reality i.e. is what we experience "correct".

At the end of this chapter also Olbers' paradox is discussed.



Do you expect that fishes have an idea that they are surrounded by and move in water?

Answer: No.

For fishes deep in the ocean there is no concept of water because they are always surrounded by water. This means that the concept of water or no water (i.e. something different in which they can move) for a fish does not make sense.

Exceptions are flying fishes and fishes in an aquarium. Flying fishes have a concept of water and air. Fishes in an aquarium have a concept of walls or obstructions i.e. there are places where there is no water.

A fish in the water must have the same feeling as a bird.

The fish floats (flies) in water.
The bird flies (floats) in air.


What happens when a fish performs an operation on one other fish (in water)?

Answer: Red smoke will escape (in the "air").

For a fish, their veins are filled with something "only" of a different colour than in which they move.


How do fishes communicate?

Answer: Fishes can communicate using the following:
  1. Light and their eyes.
  2. Noise and their ears.
  3. Electrical signals (radar)
  4. Water pressure.


Suppose fishes can only communicate using water pressure what will be the maximum speed with which they can swim ?

Answer: The speed of water pressure propagation.

If a such a fish could swim faster that his way of communication he or she would "constantly" collide with obstructions and die. This is not in their self interest.

In their mind c (maximum communication speed) is equal to the speed of water pressure propagation.

Similar questions can be raised for the three other ways of communication.


The demonstration shows wave movement. Two parameters are considered:

Frequency and Amplitude (height)

In the first test the Amplitude is constant. In the second test the Amplitude is variable.

In each tests two waves are shown. In the top frame the frequency is constant. In the bottom frame the frequency changes and decreases as a function of distance.

Now perform the program: THOUGHT6.EXE
From the Test Selection Display:

Select test 1

In order to observe how waves perform when the amplitude changes perform the following test:

Now perform the program: THOUGHT6.EXE
From the Test Selection Display:

Select test 2

A wave shows the movement of water particles. The wave moves forward. The water particles only move up and down. A decrease in frequency implies that the energy of the water particles decreases. The speed of the wave (not of the water particles) increases. A decrease in Amplitude also implies that the energy of the water particles decreases.

Return to CHAPTER3.TXT


In order to simulate the different conditions the parameter selection display is used


From the Parameter Selection Display the following parameters can be changed:

        0 = Select test display

1 = Set standard parameters.

2 = Screen mode. Valid values are 7,8,9 and 12. Standard value = 9 3 = Directory name. Standard name = C:\NOW\FIG

4 = Wait time in second. Physical wait time between each simulation cycle. Standard value = 0.1 5 = Speed of light. Standard value is 5

6 = Delta time in seconds between each calculation cycle. Standard value is 0.2

7 = Alpha in degrees. Standard value = 45


Olbers paradox is based on the concept of an infinite Universe. In such an Universe if you travel long enough in any direction then you should always encounter a star. As a result there should always be light in any direction.

Because this is not the case, something is wrong with Olbers' paradox.

First no theory should predict that we always should see something, with our eyes, in any direction. Because that particular capability of our eyes has no purpose or benefit. Generally speaking all our organs detect a difference in something i.e. respond on relative phenomena (change in pressure, noise, light etc), not something absolute.

The same is true for our ears to hear and for our nose to smell.

Secondly, Olbers' paradox to a certain extend true, because the detection of light depents about the size of the pixels.

Suppose your light detector consists of one pixel. For sure this pixel will be ON, implying that the whole Universe generates light.

You divide each pixel in two, again, and again etc.
Sooner or later not all the pixels will be ON.
Now you can improve the quality of your light detector, but what ever you try not all the pixels will be ON, implying that the whole Universe does not generate light, at least not enough from all directions to trigger each pixel of your light detector.

There is no real way to prove this. The only thing you can say that this is in accordance to observations. This also does not prove that light propagates at infinity. While most probably it does not, meaning light does not dilute ad infinitum but drops to zero and disappears.


What is true for light is also true for gravity.

If you can build an accurate gravity detector than you will see that gravity does not come from all directions.

Gravity, like light, does not propagate at infinity, meaning that gravity has a finite range of influence.

Return to CHAPTER3.TXT