Ekpyrotic Theory, Hyperspace Theory and Building a Universe

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Reiku, Oct 2, 2007.

  1. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    From the view of the wave function, planet earth, containing its 6 billion-odd conscious observers must make the planet more real than any other unhabited planet, since the wave function is constantly being collapsed - the wave function still exists in all of space and time, but its value is vanishingly small. You can imagine our entire planet being projected via the wave function throughout all of space and time, right past Pluto, to the very boundary or surface of the expanding universe - though this wave function is highly unlikely. It is the most likely result of the wave function that makes our planet what it is, including everything in it. The quantum wave function governs absolutely any result possibility; and that must also mean the universe as a whole, not just planets.
    Stephen Hawkings is the founder of a new scientific principle called, 'Quantum Cosmology.' Now... before you point out it is a contradiction, because 'quantum' refers to the world of protino's and neutralino's, and 'cosmology' refers to the large universe of planets and infinite space, it was meant to conflict; Stephen Hawkings say's that we should view the universe as an atom.
    In the very beginning, just before Big Bang, the wave function governed how our universe would start up. According to theory, our universe had an infinite amount of setup conditions it could have chose from, and the wave function governed which one was most likely to occur. However, because no one was there to observe the early universe, each possibility had to arise side-by-side.
    Our universe, according to Stephen Hawkings, is the way it is because of a high probability factor. There will be other universes that have a wave function that surround our own, but there values will be vanishingly small. These universes will have remained superimposed on our own universe ever since big bang.
    This brings the uniqueness back into a universe that is one of an infinite amount of universes. If there exists an infinite amount of universes, we could imagine an infinite number of parallel universes with similar life as this one, and that takes away the importance of 'us'. Yet, the analogy of imagining the universe as an atom has brought the importance back to our universe, because our universe is, according to Hawkings, the 'correct one', with a high probability factor.
    There is no current method for us traveling to these other universes - our technology is simply, far too inadequate; we don't even know how to prove their existences for that matter. Hawkings believes that there might be a baby twin universe, curled up into the 6th dimension of spacetime - if this is true, as is predicted by 'hyperspace theory', we may be able to probe it someday.
    What is hyperspace theory? Before the Big Bang, it states that our universe had ten dimensions, just like superstring theory predicts. Then, very suddenly, the universe 'cracked', and our universe was born. This cataclysmic event allowed our 4-dimensional space to expand, whilst our twin 6-dimensional universe contracted in a volatile manor, and shrank to infinitesimal size. In fact, we find that the Ekpyrotic Theory evidently goes hand-in-hand with this hypothesis.
    If hyperspace theory is correct, then it can explain that the current observable rapid expansion of the universe was a result of the cataclysm - thus, the death of our universe, which will most possibly be caused by rapid expansion causing the 'Big Chill', may in fact be caused by the cracking of multi-dimensional spacetime. It could also explain the Big Bang itself.

    In physics, the multiverse theory is a difficult theory to accept - well, at least it is for me - the only way i could describe my contempt for it is the way Einstein rejected the path of Quantum Mechanics. The reason for this is simple. I do not believe the Universe can so easily split off into as many universe-possibilities as there are actualities, every time something comes to do anything - especially in the case of ourselves.
    Fair enough, the theory of Parallel Universes could answer many gaping questions - questions such as, 'why the wave function exits', and why and how our universe selected these 'dimensional conditions', of one time dimension and three spatial dimensions. Of course - it could also explain consciousness itself! Let me explain: The universes are all positioned upon each other like a ''fine mesh'', we call 'superpositioning'. A single object in space will extend into infinity through these universes - but occupies the exact same space. Thus, a single mind in this universe would extend onto infinity, also sharing the same space. Then consciousness is explained to arise out of the split - whenever our minds posit a question or experience, the universe must split out into as many possibilities that can exist through the wave function.
    Though - again, something for me resents this postulate. Throughout all of my posts, i have been attempting to bring back the importance of the observer in the universe - but 'her' role is being exploited here, and her importance fades into the infinity of universes!

    What if only two universes existed?
    This question was called an 'Oxymoron' - it seemed to present a contradiction in terms - two universes simply couldn't exist... Though our universe might be one of an infinite amount, i am amused however in something called the 'Ekpyrotic Cosmological Theory' (ECT): What if our universe has a siemese twin? This is what ECT states. Its perfectly identical, conjoined, yet separate twin is connected to our universe through a force that allows it to bounce off our own universe to such a distance away, it will finally pull back to collide with our own universe.
    When they do collide, it will trigger another Big Bang all over again, spilling all that potential consciousness, matter and energy through the wave function, no matter how vanishingly small their probabilities lye. This Big Bang will engulf both universes simultaneously - and that must mean the great sea of consciousness itself - creating everything all over again - but with a slight quantum difference; a decrease in the 'Cosmological Constant'. You might remember the Cosmological Constant.
    The Cosmological Constant was created by Albert Einstein in 1915, in an attempt to design a universe that was static. However, the discovery of the Hubble red shift, the measuring of distances between objects in space showed that the universe was in fact expanding. He thus cast the Cosmological Constant to the side, calling it his 'biggest blunder.' However, in the discovery of recent observations of an accelerating universe, astrophysicists where able to bring the Cosmological Constant back into play.
    The real problem with the Cosmological Constant today, is that it is around 122 times smaller than what should be predicted from Big Bang... However, if the Siamese twin theory is correct, then the value in the Cosmological Constant appears to be smaller because the collisions of the two universes have brought it gradually down - thus, one might imagine the Big Bang to have occurred many, many times.

    Right now, physicists are devising new theories on how to experimentally test this. In the writing of this book, Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University, and Neil Turok of the University of Cambridge believe that it might be possible to experimentally test this theory through the discovery of the so-far-unseen 'gravitational waves,' that are thought to ripple ever outwards throughout all of spacetime. However, though the big bang states that these gravitational waves are thought to pervade spacetime, the two scientists believe that they are rare, to say the least. 'Ekpyrotic' comes from the Greek word, 'conflagration.' It was coined by Steinhardt, Ovrut, Turok and Khoury in the DAMPT in Cambridge, England.
    The Ekpyrotic Theory is directly linked to String Theory - therefore, our universe and our twin will be classified as 'branes', instead of parallel universes though there is very little difference between the two expressions. Before our universe collided with our siemese twin, our universe was completely frozen. When the brane collided into our own universe it sent the gravitational waves rippling, exciting fluctuations in temperature and density - and above all, it gave rise to matter - a soup of quark gasses. This theory is being recognized as quite a serious theory by physicists, because it seems to be a better alternative to both the standard interpretation of the big bang coupled with cosmic inflation, (when the universe spurted out everything faster-than-light).
    The difference with the standard model of big bang and the big bang described by the Ekpyrotic Theory is that it wasn't a big bang at all - paradoxically enough. The cataclysm of big bang in this theory rather states that there was an event when the immense energy in the infant universe quite literally drove it to expansion.
    Paul Steinhardt, mentioned just previously say's, ‘'our universe begins in a static, featureless state, that persisted for eons.''
    ''But how long are we talking about,'' One might ask. The truth is we cannot be sure. We could be talking numbers anything like trillions upon trillions of years. The Ekpyrotic Theory though, isn't too different to the usual parallel universe theory - as each universe exists in a superpositioning as myriad sheets all placed among each other. Accordingly, there was a collision; and this set everything in motion.
    As Ovrut explains, ' It's a beautiful idea because it says that all of the particles we see actually arise from one object... a string.'' Weird this isn't it? All these strings’ particles contained in the universe and all universes actually constitute one single mega-string! The only way to describe this is by analogously describing this single string as being like a normal string of cotton. Like any fabric weaved into one single string, it is made up itself of much smaller string, all finely interwoven into each, causing them to join into one single woven string. The strings that represent gravity in this universe can easily flow into another brane, and this is how they all couple to each other. They are closed strings.

    How Might We Detect Gravitational Waves?

    Finding their presence, whether they are frequent or rare, is going to be difficult. The 'Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory' (LIGO) in America, belonging to NASA scientists, are now searching for the waves - by the possible phenomena of Black Hole collisions.
    Black Holes themselves have so far been undetectable, but Relativity and Quantum Theory predicts their existences. They are exotic, perfectly spherical dark or glowing objects in space that contain so much mass that they can distort spacetime to such a degree, it practically drags it round with it at the speed of light. These distortions are so strong; they are even able to slow a photon, a particle of light right down to zero-speed. Thus, even the fastest known particle cannot escape its wrath.
    The collision of two Black Holes would shudder space and time - similar to the conditions of a quaking big bang, and the collision would send out ripples of gradational waves at the speed of light from the location of impact. Because of this, in order to find the illusive waves, we will have to keep our eyes to the stars.

    But we might even want to create a universe in the future, even if this is the only universe...The question to whether we could ever simulate or recreate another universe was even pondered by the legendaries of past times - and even today. With modern technology, and its ever-expanding spectrum of quantum knowledge, scientists are now contemplating on how to build a universe from scratch - in a lab. This may not be a distant theory, as i shall translate for you.
    Well renown professor of physics, at Birmingham University, John Nelson has been working with particle accelerators that accelerate gold atoms to a speed of 99.995% of 'c' - the speed of light, which is near enough 186,000 miles per second. Then these 'fast' Bradyons smash against each other in a burst of energy; but this collision will be nothing like the atom smasher of CERN, when it finally executes its first experiment in August 07, which has now obviously past.
    Prof. Nelson's project is run by a team of elite scientists, who perform these tasks in the (SLA) - the Stanford Linear Accelerator. It smashes Electrons and Positrons (antielectrons) together, at an equivalent temperature of about 600 million million degrees centigrade. Such projects transpire, so that scientists can replicate similar conditions within the first few 'instants' after the miracles, spontaneous appearance of spacetimematterenergy. The problematic equations are at play here; antimatter should have annihilated matter within the first few instants...
    However, his scientists have found a possible solution to reasoning this matter-antimatter paradox. They found an effect, later called the 'CP Violation' However, this theory is fraught with controversy, as it doesn't attain the answers for correct observations in the present types of matter within the universe... it is an estimated 10 billion times in error for universal reality. But, you see... this is where violations take hold on us. They usually quantum leap, so-to-say, into even more inexplicable assumptions. CP Violation is an effect which leads to breakdown in symmetry in fundamental interactions. It shows discrepancies in the 'supposed' identical natures of particles, such as the law of antimatter and matter distribution.

    Moving on, they have created a 'supercomputer,' that can simulate billions of 'test particles', hoping to find new theoretical assumptions on universal birth; because of the mysterious predictions of Dark Matter and Dark Energy - two powerful forces that is thought to play a major role in the functioning of the universe. You see, the 'dark' corresponds to the painfully obvious fact we know nothing of its origins, nor do we know anything of its nature or role within our vast universe. It may have even had a role in universal expansion - and even some pseudo theorists believe that Einstein’s equations on these forces might have been responsible for the original expansion of our universe.
    Particle accelerators and computer simulations aren't really enough - about, a quadrillion times less experimentals needed. Since we cannot generate power to this magnitude, we must therefore opt. for creating our universe - a universe, inside a universe... a weird, but potentially dangerous thing to do... we will get to these inconsistencies later.
    Dirac postulated that the electron that is, assuming it is the smallest object known, with the most basic fundamental negative electrical charge, there must be an equally basic unit of magnetism.
    This basic unit of magnetism is called a 'Magnetic Monopole.' Now, well-renown scientists in Japan, led by physicist and Professor Nobuyuki Sakai of Yamagata University believe that using 'Magnetic Monopoles' might make universe creation possible.
    (Magnetic Monopoles are subatomic objects that may contain enough 'false-vacuum-energy', to create a micro black hole. They are like tiny little magnets, but only possessing one magnetic pole. Earth for instance has two - north and south - these tiny objects have one, curling into itself).
    Magnetic Monopoles, being even smaller than the smallest particle, make them difficult to detect, and so far has proved fruitless. But Relativity and Quantum Mechanics predict such exotic phenomena. Prof. Sakai informs us, 'if one is ever detected, we might be able to release this false energy, and use it to create a universe in the lab.'
    But this is where the physics go a bit strange for the observer - in which case, it would be ourselves - the new universe that 'splits' off our own space and time, is but connected through a topological opening, caused by the gravitational stresses - but not of a Singularity, since Stephen Hawkings has learned how to mathematically remove them (but we will see how this might even turn out to be his greatest blunder*, as i will explain soon - bare with me).
    The Universe created, itself would look like a Black Hole, from our observational perspective... or more accurately, the baby universe will be entrapped inside a Black Hole Droplet. As we have already seen in this chapter, our universe too could be a Black Hole.

    * When Einstein developed his theory of gravity, he was convinced that the universe was static - but his gravitational calculations seemed to prove him wrong. He thus 'fiddled' around with his mathematical conclusions until he 'manipulated' his calculations to fit a static universe. But later findings in the measurement of 'Time-Warps,' using Hubble’s gravitational 'Red Shift' proved Einstein to be flawed, as he called it his ''biggest blunder''. We should have learned from this, as the moral is to trust our instincts. Hawkings first instinct was that the universe could potentially contain an infinite amount of Singularities, but now dismisses them as nothing but a clever error in mathematical calculation. In singularities, infinity takes hold of space and time, and they are exceptionally difficult to work with, if it wasn't for something called, 'Renormalization,' which states that an infinity can only ever be cancelled out by another infinity. Perhaps Hawkings should have trusted his instincts on 'Singular Behavior', since it is predicted by both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, not to mention Cosmology itself. He hasn't had much success out of Singularities mind you, but he is now the founder of a new law called 'Quantum Cosmology,' the linking of Quantum Physics and Cosmology, to form the clever unification of a subatomic universe. Thus, in my opinion, he has the stronger argument, as Singularities don't need to be detained within the laws of Physics, however, i am torn between the fact Einstein too did a similar thing, and made a big mistake.

    Prof. Sakai say's, 'if we create a universe, we would see it, as though it where but a black hole. The Black Hole would be so small, that it would quickly evaporate through quantum effects. But the new universe would expand eternally. That might sound strange, but it is possible in strongly curved spacetime.'

    Reiku :m:
    Peace
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Klippymitch Thinker Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    699
    I like Einstein's static theory. I myself have came to think the same without even knowing he did it first. Well actually Ive never read his static theory but the word static is what got me.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    There are a handful of people who say that Background Microwave Temperatures and the red-shift are false, and a more appropriate theory is needed. These people still hold to a static universe theory.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. bsemak Just this guy, you know Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    240
    True, but they are just a handful.......
     
  8. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    You're right... only a bleeding handful eh? But you know what... the static universe still has life in it yet... i prefer the newer name... ''Steady-State...'' Created by one of my hero's of science, Sir Fred Hoyle, who sadly passed away in 2001
     
  9. bsemak Just this guy, you know Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    240
    Fred Hoyle was a great man, in particluar the work on how the heavy elements are formed in stars is one of the great discoveries.

    However, steady state is not relevant anymore. "Big Bang" theory does fit the observations best, regardless any philosophical considerations. There is no evidence of the C-field Hoyle proposed. Also his quasi steady state theory was not accepted. You need to combine theory with observation, big bang seems to have the best fit.
     

Share This Page