Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cyclic Universe a Possibility

Posted by michael on from the come-on-let's-make-another-revolution dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes "Spacedaily has a post(from Science) about a new theory at odds with the big bang theory. The researchers claim that this theory of an oscillating energy field could be experimentally tested in the coming years."

2 of 354 comments (clear)

  1. A little wishful thinking, perhaps? by sam_handelman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The latest versions of the big bang theory, with the addition of dark energy or whatever, of an extra repulsive force, predict, basically, the entropic death of everything - the universe as we know it today, with hot stars and habitable planets and the like, exists for some finite period and then disperses forever.

    There is certainly a desire - I feel it, myself - that the universe not be that way. It is far more pleasant to think that it will regenerate itself and that complex phenomena like life could re-emerge in some subsequent cycle. However, it is important, as scientists, that we not give in to wishful thinking of that sort.

    While these branes are a cute idea in a number of respects - not just because a parallel plane full of dark matter is 100% cool old school science fiction - it strikes me that they answer "how can we match our observations to what we want to be true?" rather than "how can we match our explanations to what we observe?"

    Which is not to say that it isn't an excellent theory - merely that there is extreme intellectual danger associated this sort of speculation.

    Let me say also - Entropy is a thorough bitch. Whatever the laws of physics turn out to be, and whatever cycles they may allow, if subsequent phenomena depend in any way on previous phenomena (phenomena being the most general term I can manage), there will be a tendency for the whole shebang to degenerate, to move into a more likely state. It is possible that the most likely state for the whole universe involves repeated regeneration of galaxy-rich explosions like the one we all inhabit, but it is also possible that subsequent big bangs would be smaller and smaller in size, eventually dwindling below some critical threshold to generate stars and the like.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  2. Re:Uh oh... by slackerweb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The big bang or any other theory of the universe does not contradict the existance of God, it only contradicts their narrow-minded view of God.