Slashdot Mirror
New Universes Will be Born from Ours
David Shiga writes "What gruesome fate awaits our universe? Some physicists have argued that it is doomed to be ripped apart by runaway dark energy, while others think it is bouncing through an endless series of big bangs and big crunches. Now, scientists have combined these two ideas to create another option, in which our universe ultimately shatters into billions of pieces. Each shard would then subsequently grow into a whole new universe. The model could solve the mystery of why our early universe was surprisingly well ordered."
The Last Question. htm
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~mlindsey/asimov/question
Just ask the good Jedi how they feel about "Balance" now...
There has been a lot of research showing that Black Holes themselves are essentially fundamental particles. Coupled with (even if string theory isn't true the fundamental particle geometry is interesting) two concepts of measuring distance. Such that when one passes the Plank Length the 'easy' way of measuring distance becomes hard and measures the reciprocal instead, while the previous hard way becomes easy. Then throw into all of this the notion that we are all moving through space-time at constant velocity (light speed - this is why when you travel faster through space time slows down. so no-one really understands what time is, or how many dimensions (of 11, say) are time, or whether they are essentially different from space, mathematically, physically or philosophically.
So yeah, i'm just about willing to believe anything right now.
I'm a physics teacher currently teaching about the Big Bang and possible ends of the Universe. I'm just wondering if there are any research physicists in the room who could tell me which theory of the end of the Universe has the most physical evidence to support it at the current time.
Thank you,
-CGP
You frequently get the question "Why is the universe {whatever}?" or "In order to support human life, the universe had to be {whatever}."
This is frequently used to support the idea of divine intervention.
If you ask such a question or make such an observation, you have to remember:
The fact that we are here to observe it greatly restricts the possibilities, so what seems like "long odds" isn't long odds after all.
To put it another way:
If you play in the Superbowl and win, and your friends congratulate you, you don't say "What are the odds of my friends congratulating me for winning the Superbowl? There are 300,000,000 million Americans and only a few dozen have friends who congratulated them for winning the 2007 Super Bowl. That is rare, this is proof of divine intervention in my life."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If you define a different universe as being physically distinct from ours, then yes;
If parts of our universe started out in the same singularity as us but are now outside of our light-cone, then they are in effect physically separate from us, so that places them in a different universe, doesn't it? If they are outside our light-cone, and can no longer affect us, then they are not in our universe anymore but since they still exist, I think you have to consider them as being in a different universe.
Of course it means they have to be outside of our entire universe's light-cone...
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
See, that's why I like the Torah.
It was originally written in hebrew. Guess what? It's still read in hebrew.
I may not follow the jewish religion spiritually or even traditionally...but I still feel we have the holy text that is closest to what how it was originally written...
That doesn't explain why using electricity on shabbat is considered work but walking five miles because you aren't supposed to drive is NOT considered work. Fuck that.
Living With a Nerd
I see no problem with a fourth dimension expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.
Here's how we can define it:
"The fourth dimension is expanding rleative to the three spatial dimensions."
What laws or axioms or postulates has the above statement violated?
None that I can see.
What the author seems to be saying is that time is an emergent property of this underlying physical reality, which they then use to unify seemingly disparate physical phenomena.
"The fourth dimension is expanding rleative to the three spatial dimensions."
This would explain why everything propagates through space-time at the velocity c--this never changes.