Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Claim 'Cold Spot' In Space Could Offer Evidence of a Parallel Universe (inhabitat.com)
New submitter LCooke writes: A international research team led by the University of Durham thinks a mysterious cold spot in the universe could offer evidence of a parallel universe. The cold spot could have resulted after our universe collided with another. Physicist Tom Shanks said, [...] "the cold spot might be taken as the first evidence for the multiverse -- and billions of other universes may exist like our own." From the report via Inhabitat: "NASA first discovered the baffling cold spot in 2004. The cold spot is 1.8 billion light years across and, as you may have guessed, colder than what surrounds it in the universe. Scientists thought perhaps it was colder because it had 10,000 less galaxies than other regions of similar size. They even thought perhaps the cold spot was just a trick of the light. But now an international team of researchers think perhaps the cold spot could actually offer evidence for the concept of a multiverse. The Guardian explains an infinite number of universes make up a multiverse; each having its own reality different from ours. These scientists say they've ruled out the last-ditch optical illusion idea. Instead, they think our universe may have collided with another in what News.com.au described as something like a car crash; the impact could have pushed energy away from an area of space to result in the cold spot." The study has been published in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
Only in the same way that your car only gets crumbled up in a car crash with another car that is already crumbled up.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
it could have been caused by monkeys flying out of my ass.................... just sayin
I would say, when a bunch of cosmologists come up with a potential explanation - even an extraordinary one - there is at least a chance they are able to argue for a causal connection and a theory, whereas your lame put-down clearly isn't even meant to meet the same standards.
they used the wrong kind of thermometer.
In the multiverse, there is actually a universe where monkeys are flying out of your butt.
Isn't the term "parallel universe" misleading? I think anything that can affect our reality is still part of the universe, isn't it? What would the definition of "universe" be otherwise?
In the good universe, both lost because the US have several viable parties there.
You mean the water on mario's feet he uses to accumulates enough speed to perform the parallel universe traveling?
"We measure things by what we are. To the maggots in the cheese, the cheese is the universe. To the worms in the corpse, the corpse is the cosmos..."
To the people on the internet, the internet is... the field of dreams?
The size of the cold spot is hypothesized to be precisely as large as a noodly appendage. Coincidence?
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
It's just the Roseanne Barr black hole decloaking for her new show.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
I would say, when a bunch of cosmologists come up with a potential explanation - even an extraordinary one - there is at least a chance they are able to argue for a causal connection and a theory, whereas your lame put-down clearly isn't even meant to meet the same standards.
I fail to see what renders "another bubble universe" substantially less constrainable of a concept for explaining the unexplained vs. "god" or "aliens".
Personally I'm quite happy with my odds of going through life blindly labeling anyone who goes to the multiverse well to explain something they don't understand a fool. You could call me a short sighted buffoon and I could of course one day end up being wrong...
Only problem I can't seem to bring myself to give a flying ***** anymore than I care to entertain stories of space aliens and permanent magnet anti-gravity free energy devices.
You are technically right, but a natural language is not mathematics. A black hole is not a black hole, and the milky way is not made of milk.
you will inevitably get below average.
The voids in space for galaxies are just places where there's less mass to form galaxies. Which then means there's more gravitational attraction where the galaxies are, which means stuff that is in that lower density region is pulled out making it more of a void.
Likewise with telescopes, you can get a better optic by buying a bigger telescope then putting an off-axis stop which you can move about to find the bit where the larger lens or mirror is more perfectly the right shape than the average, therefore improving optical performance.
So, no, "It's colder than average" means nothing more than saying the earth is warmer than average and on average empty space is colder than the average of all space.
Except where the major party is one short of a filibuster proof mandate.
You know, like Joe Lieberman. There was only one of him but he managed to fuck everyone over by voting for his donors rather than his constituents or the citizens of the USA. Imagine if he'd been replaced by a Green candidate who wasn't bought by the medical insurance industry? You would have had a public option to choose from as well as any other free market choice that the private industry could bring to bear against the "incompetent and inefficient" public option.
Just one seat fucked you all up badly.
The real explaination is much, much simpler.
The North Pole is melting due to global warming, and consequently Santa moved his house to a different galaxy, cooling it down in the process.
You can totally tell that Santa is an alien btw, because all his offspring are little green men with big eyes and pointy ears...
Could it be that we're quibbling over semantics? Let's examine a word.
What is "the universe"? What if it simply means "everything, everywhere, all the time". What magicians call "all that is, seen and unseen"?
"Everything" is an all-inclusive infinitive. Logically nothing can not be included in everything.
That leaves us with the scientific quest to explore everything, and thereby exclude nothing.
Just a rambling muse before coffee...
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
that just makes you extra dumb.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
There seems to be a language barrier... The postulation is that we can only observe 13.5 billion light years away from us in any direction, and with it there is a wall that we can't see beyond as light, radiation, and general energy just hasn't gotten here yet. Amidst that, we see radiation that isn't uniform, but is mostly similar. As we can't observe past the edge of this wall of sorts, there may or may not be /something/ amidst the vast emptiness of the cosmos. Ergo, in a purely physical sense, there /may/ be something beyond the physical space that we can't yet see, and it may be interfering with what we'd perceive as the cosmic background radiation of our /limited, but vast/ view of the cosmos. As such, it can be that what has previously been defined as the 'universe' may just be a larger iteration of galaxies, and physically separate and adjacent - rather than occupying the same coordinate system in an inobservable way - there exists another very large 'universe' that ours may have previously interacted with, influencing the distribution of the cosmic background radiation.
Think of it like "large gravity fields impacts the flow of light by bending it" except instead of inward towards our universe, portions are being pulled /outwards/ effectively reducing the amount directed towards us, or slowing it's travel.
Thirty four characters live here.
"alternative facts" come from...?
"Parallel universe" makes people think of the trope.
I think "perpendicular universe" would be better, and it's probably more accurate since parallel things don't intersect.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
This makes me think of the eye's 'blind spot',
Strange . . . this makes me think of the universe's G-spot.
Which, if it really is cold, would explain a lot of things that are wrong with the universe.
. . . and makes it even more incredible that a bunch of geeky scientists were able to find it at all!
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
While that is a perfectly reasonable explanation, and there are even certain ways it may be correct, but the issue is that the cold spot isn't actually at the edge of the visible universe.
The cold spot begins roughly 6 billion light years away from us, and extends to roughly 10 billion light years away.
That leaves roughly 3.5 billion light years of space "behind" it before reaching the edge of our visible universe.
It also doesn't appear to be a sphere of temp difference either, as from our vantage point it only extends about 1 billion light years across at its widest points.
Also of note, while our view from Earth outwards is fairly spherical for the most part, using the term "depth" or "distance away" can become confusing if simplified to the point of ignoring the measurements and math behind what we are actually observing.
The distance is measured as an amount of red shift, not what would be considered travel time.
The temperature of the cold spot is only being compared with the mean temperature of the other areas of space at the same measured red shift.
If you exclude the cold spot for a moment, the mean temperature of any other point of space we can observe at the same red shift amount is just under 20 micro-kelvin.
Including the cold spot again, it differs from the mean temperature by 70 to 140 micro-kelvin.
No where else in space at this red shift has a difference in temperature even close to 4-8 times colder.
Thus it is perfectly reasonable to consider this spot an anomaly.
Back to the postulation you made, like I mentioned you could still actually be correct.
From our point of view the edge of the visible universe is 13.5 billion light years away, which contains the cold spot and roughly 3.5 billion light years more space "behind" it.
But from the point of view of the cold spot itself, being roughly 4 billion light years in size along one particular axis, the cold spots visible universe extends 9.5 billion light years away from it, which is very roughly 20 billion light years away from us, far past our visible universe.
So it is quite possible for something Else to be going on in space basically on the other side of the cold spot, past where it is possible for us to observe, but close enough to the cold spot to cause an effect on it.
Sadly once we leave "theoretical science" and come back to "science", both of the explanations (actually most any explanation) is not within the realm of testable/verifiable observation.
Given a multiverse explanation, we likely can never know if that is the case.
Given your explanation, we certainly can't know now if that's the case, and we would need to still be around in 20+ billion years to do so.
(Which technically means it's safe to say "humanity" will never know. Whatever our decedents call themselves at that time, assuming they exist, may know, but it won't be humanity)
The odds of such a spot forming randomly by chance are embarrassingly tiny.
(On the other hand, it seems the odds of intelligent life emerging at random chance are similarly tiny too, and we know that happened at least once!)
So it would be very nice to at least rule that possibility out first, before worrying about an explanation on what caused it.
But both the resolution of our observations, and the detail level of our simulations, are so poor still that we can't rule out chance yet. Some even argue it wouldn't be possibly, so there is no "yet".
If universes were capable of colliding, then the term "parallel" would definitely be misleading (and inaccurate:-) )
the cold spots visible universe extends 9.5 billion light years away from it, which is very roughly 20 billion light years away from us, far past our visible universe.
If this universe emerged from a singularity and expanded at no more than the speed of light, than the observable universe by extents of light reach is the entire universe. How would a far away area get light from further away unless the universe expanded faster than light?
cold spot = center of the universe. If everything expanded from there, would anything be left there?
Given so-called parallel universes are in other planes of reality that we cannot ever travel to because we have no commonality of any spatial dimensions, how can a hypothesis that talks about a physical collision between the two universes, and even located at a particular geographical spot in ours, even make any sense?
when the choices are super super evil, and only kind of slightly super super evil.. the pick is evident.
There seems to be an understanding and knowledge barrier. Your facts are incorrect from your second sentence. After that was not worth reading
why were you modded down for this? wtf do people have no common sense? "we dont know how it works, but it doesnt work like that"
The fact that they found it, means that its obviously not the universe's g-spot.
Parallel lines on a sphere collide. If you're not in a rectilinear euclidian geometry space, parallel doesn't mean what you claim it does.
I voted Cthulhu. Why choose the lesser evil?
Your "if" evaluates to false. The (very) early universe expanded far faster than the speed of light. This is possible because it was spacetime itself expanding FTL, not something trying to travel through it.
-- Alastair
These days "the universe" mostly means something like "all places that exist within our four-dimensional spacetime", i.e. if you could conceivably hit it if you could somehow shoot a nearly infinitely fast bullet at it
(in reality, the light speed limitation, plus the accelerating expansion of the universe, places even most of even the tiny bubble that is our visible universe beyond our ability to ever contact. We can only see the light they emitted long ago, before the exponentially expanding space between us had carried them forever out of contact).
"Parallel" universes, of most of the dozen or so theoretical forms that are currently considered plausible, are something different - there is literally no path through space that can ever reach them - they exist as a completely independent bubble of spacetime and may (probably) have completely different laws of physics, and can only interact with ours during occasional collisions within whatever higher-dimensionality system we all exist in (and possibly through gravity with some forms)
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
(On the other hand, it seems the odds of intelligent life emerging at random chance are similarly tiny too, and we know that happened at least once!)
[citation needed]
I haven't seen any evidence for it. Maybe I'm just hanging out on the wrong sites.
This is a highly speculative interpretation of existing data. Other speculative interpretations are possible. The scientific method would dictate proceeding by designing clever experiments whose outcomes could rule out various alternative interpretations. I'm not convinced this is possible here, and not persuaded that this is true science. Certainly it's not "evidence".
With all due respect, the monkey-filled rectum scenario is at least as plausible as the submitted story.
And in a parallel universe, it may even be the most logical one. Just like, in most parallel universes, Donald Trump is not president. Unfortunately, in the "infinite worlds" scenario, it's guaranteed that anything that could happen, would happen in at least one universe. We just happen to be in "that" universe - the one with the planet that intelligent life avoids at all cost.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
We know there's intelligent life out there - look how they avoid us :-)
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
You want the multiverse two doors down, where what you say is true.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I disagree. The monkey theory is based in reality because it's occurring within our universe. When you talk about things outside our universe you're in the realm of religion.
Bullshit. Nobody is asking you to take it on faith or belief based on a "textus receptus." We may some day be able, at least in theory, to put it to the test, same as we tested other theories, like the existence of bacteria, the failure of the accepted view of spontaneous transformation of meat into maggots, moons around other planets, or even, one day, intelligent life on Earth.
Your backhanded appeal to religion shows a lack of both imagination and curiosity, two essential ingredients for the advancement of knowledge.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Or maybe the energy is flowing into the past, which we now see today as the cosmic background radiation, big bang, etc. Who knows - it's probably stranger than we can imagine at this point.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
You ask "how speculation on astrophysics can somehow be related to Trump vs Clinton." Since you asked, here's one possibility - there may be a sane universe where neither of them were even candidates. Let's face it - 2 years ago, if anyone had said "President Trump", you'd say they were either deluded or living in an alternate universe. You're not deluded - we are living in that alternate universe, where the improbable happens more often than can be reasonably expected. Hence the attempts to explain it away via "God did it", etc.
Well, at least it's a theory that fits the facts ... and answers your question.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I'm voting for the Ford Galaxy.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Yes, of course, making sure people have health insurance, having environmental regulations, that's all evil, wouldn't want to vote for that, would you?
The so called WMAP cold spot looks to just be some sort of data error and probably does not in fact exist
Too bad because the idea was seriously cool and would have been useful for science fiction.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
"My momma always said, watch out for the cold wet spot, right after two galaxies bump into each other," says Tom Shanks, aspiring local physicist.
The 9-ball on my pool table would like to have a word with you...
How's life in the hypocrite lane?
With all due respect, the monkey-filled rectum scenario is at least as plausible as the submitted story.
Let's examine that claim. On one hand, we have a hypothesis, proposed by a person or a team, who have an established reputation as being scientists, and whose hypothesis ties into existing theories, although the hypothesis itself is largely speculative.They are trying to do what all, good scientists do, namely make falsifiable predictions, and their colleagues can therefore scrutinise their reasoning and try find relevant data. That difference may not impress you, but to a scientist it is important.
Witness BitZtream getting pwned!
or ford prefect...
Energy doesn't get "pushed". Those words were used by "staff writers at News Corp Australia Network" and not scientists. It's similar to those who claim that black holes suck up light and energy like a vacuum.