The Big Flow Theory

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Reiku, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    The Big Flow Theory

    In Quantum Cosmology Dr. Hawking wants us to view the universe is a very unique way. If we are indeed to take Hawkings seriously by viewing the universe as an atom, does that mean the universe will quantum leap in the future? Coming back to this question, two main things can happen, depending on what kind of energy state our universe is in. There are two known states called 'Ground State,' and 'Excited State.'

    A ground state atom arranges its inhabitants; the electron, the proton and the neutron ect., to a certain frequency, so that they can have the smallest energy possible. If our universe isn't in a ground state, it could have come from a singularity in space, a bit like the kind found inside of black holes... However, i would like to add, that Hawkings is not so sure any more if singularities really exist. Thus, if our universe is in a ground state, it wouldn't have come from a singular region. Instead, it will have had at its center an opening in the fabric of space and time; this is a worm hole, threaded with a substance called 'exotic matter’. This wormhole might loop in on our own universe, and anything that can travel through it, might turn up in a different region of space, at a totally different time of history - theoretically, i could jump into the wormhole a few minutes after big bang, and end up coming out of the wormhole, 40-odd billion years later when the universe decides to contract. Or, if theory is correct as we have seen, it might link this universe up with other universes.

    A ground state atom will not spill out energy - this means that it is a very stable particle. If our universe is in its ground state, it will not be able to quantum leap in the future. If the atom is in an excited state, then it will eventually spill out its energy and will inexorably quantum leap. If it was a universe i am speaking about here, it will spill out its energy, quite possibly into a branch that is in its ground state, and will quantum leap.

    Now even though Dr. Hawking has shown us that anything that moves into a Black Hole becomes ‘’mangled’’ the information creating a thing is never lost, so nothing can move into other universes: That is, unless it was at the very beginning of time. He has never suggested this, but it makes perfect sense, if we assume that if nothing existed, then something from another universe could enter here in this universe, so long as the other universe has just ended… a big crunch, followed by a big bang.

    It may become evident that I am suggesting a whole new creation to matter: Something which will allow energy to enter this universe from another universe, without resorting to the standard interpretation that energy came ‘’from nowhere’’. It simply came around into existence.

    I don’t like this, and is admittedly the only real problem I have with the big bang theory. But, if energy came from the other universe, crushing its energy into our universe, then even that universe must have got its energy from somewhere.

    This is where timelike curves comes into play. Energy flowing through a finite number of universes, in a timelike curve which in theory, even though a beginning was necessary, is possible to remove all notions of what we specifically call a beginning; in short, the universes, possibly something like 10^100 or even 10^500 predicted by string theory landscape, is from the moment the first universe became excited with energy, was all shared among them in one massive time loop…

    If there is a supermassive time-loop within all the universes, then there can’t be a real definite end or beginning to any universe, but rather an infinite amount of beginnings and ends…

    Do you like?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    First of all, if a wormhole connects two universes, then they are not causally disconnected---there is a way for events in one universe to effect the events in another universe, so automatically they become one universe.

    Secondly, I am not sure that this makes sense. If things travel between universes, then there is no reason why they can't do it when they ``want'' to.

    This is pretty suspect---do you have any equations that would convince me this is right?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    No no equations as of yet. I don't have that kind of time.

    But let me try and clarify some concepts for you.

    ''First of all, if a wormhole connects two universes, then they are not causally disconnected---there is a way for events in one universe to effect the events in another universe, so automatically they become one universe.''

    I'd agree, therego, i would lean towards it connecting within its own spacetime continuum.

    Now, information cannot be lost. Before Hawking cleaned his theory up, he proposed that that things fell into black holes and disappeared from spacetime into other universes. Now the problem with this, was that information cannot simply be destroyed out of existence. It needs to be self-consistent, in that quantum mechanics says that information cannot be lost.

    This is true.

    Therefore, I have taken this one step further. Instead of saying information is lost to a living universe, information, energy and matter can be in fact squeezed in one go from one universe and into another, so long as there is no universe left to say ''there is something lost,'' therefore, if a universe crushed it's energy and information into our universe, not only does this provide a meaning to where matter came from, but we can extend it to be an infinite mathematical time loop.

    Do you understand?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    As you should realize, this makes perfect sense, and shouldn't have any paradoxical solution. I've pondered this long enough now to be confident to show this to the world. I want to give energy and matter an origin, instead of what the standard interpretation predicts.
     
  8. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Can i also say (and pray the mods and scientists alike don't hound me), is that from a divine perspective, this scheme is diabolical. If God is quantum mechanics, that He is the nature we see around us, and that this universe has a fate to that which i describe, then He has created a universe which will end, and to save Himself from death, He has provided the mechanism that His energy and His information be transposed into a new configuration t-1 chronon of Omega... He lives on into infinity, without actually living an infinite lifespan... Now, this time loop i speak of would look quite strange. It wouldn't be a loop at all, but more like a figure of eight... God is a rushing entity of energy, with different principles in each universe...
     
  9. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    I think I've heard enough.
     
  10. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    What do you mean?
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Reiku:

    I don't see how your conclusion follows from your assumption.

    Again, your broad conclusion doesn't seem to be related to your simple starting point.

    Why not? Quantum leaps go both ways - to higher energy and to lower energy.

    This is all wild speculation, with no real backing from physics.

    If you're wondering why the thread found its way to Pseudoscience, that's why.

    If you can back up anything you say with appropriate mathematical or physical reasoning, then it might be appropriate to move the thread back to Physics.
     
  12. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Thank you for being diplomatic, in the sense you asked...

    I can back it up. As a lot of you will know by now, myself and Dr. Wolf talk a lot. In his book, parallel universes; a search for other worlds, Dr. Wolf informs us that a ground state universe is very stable, and will leap in the very very very far future. But an excited state universe will quantum leap much sooner. He explains that for this to be so, energy and even information must move into somewhere, and he says that this is explained by parallel universes.

    I basically rolled off of this, showing first that it ISN'T unusual to think of the universe in such quantum terms, that even Hawking wants us to envision the universe as a single atom. Thergo, this was an efficient way to show and envision a quantum leaping universe.

    ''Why not? Quantum leaps go both ways - to higher energy and to lower energy''

    It depends on which way you see it. The process i gave was correct.

    For a ground state universe to leap into another state of configuration, it would need to move into a universe that would be an excited configuration.

    I explained that for an excited universe to quantum leap, its infromation it would move into a universe that was in its ground state (this is the same configuration Dr. Wolf shows in his book). As you can see, both states show one level higher than the other).

    The time-like curve is speculation... but its a well known speculation, as was shown by the professor in the ''E8 - time'' thread. He shows us that such curves can and does indeed remove paradoxes of science. If the energy between each and every universe is recycledover and over again into infinity, we find a state that resembles very close to the Cyclic Predictions of QM... therego, i haven't pulled these things out of pure air thankfully. As for the landscapes, and the 10^100 universes, they really are self-explanatory. Dr. DeWitt explains that there need only be 10^100 universes - but this was before the prediction of 10^500 in string theory landscape.

    I think this should be enough.
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Reiku,

    There is some chance that this discussion could generate some interesting discussion, but it is borderline unscientific. I will leave a link to it in the Physics forum, but I think it best belongs here for now.
     
  14. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Reiku---

    There are several things which are wrong with this proposal, now that I am not at work and can address them properly. I will give them to you one by one.

    Aside from blatantly violating the second law of thermodynamics, there is this:

    Not really... What you are saying, I think, is that you are injecting lots of matter all at once into the universe just after the big bang. But if you put too much matter the early universe, it is over-closed and collapses onto iself before inflation. So you don't get something that looks like our universe at all.
     
  15. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    (I know what you mean by thermodynamics, but you are forgetting that the energy moving from one universe into another in this analogy, isn't moving into a thromdynamic situation... it is literally causing a big bang all over again. So no)

    No, you must think relative. Take the analogy of how space and time expanded for a billion chronons before light or any energy emerged from spacetime. Things are consistant that there is no delay in either universe, and yet there is a major time delay when compared. Indeed, for the latter point, you need specific precision in any universe. You should have learned by now in your string theory courses that each universe in string theory is unique, and that only one outcome is permitted in each and everyone of them.

    Next
     
  16. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Oh please ben... don't hold back... i am waiting in anticipation to see what these several errors are... and since your first two where poor, or poorly integrated through poor understanding of my theory, i cannot wait to see what your other arguements are.
     
  17. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    So you're saying that the matter leaves one universe and goes to the next, but the second universe doesn't know that the matter is there untill ``a billion chronons'' have passed?
     
  18. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Not quite what i am saying...

    In effect, When the energy spontaneously flows into another universe, imagine this energy ''tunelling'' into this universe (like the standard theory goes). Therego, a time in the (first universe of origin) is what is called in physics, ''self-contained'' - meaning that even time doesn't flow the same. So, in short, the rules of this universe, which are self-consistant, is still the same big bang model.

    Relative time, i admit, is very hard to comprehend. We only know that energy took so long to enter this universe, because time was relative, so was space, and therefore, so was the distribution of matter. It's much like the very last instants of the universe... the very last billionth of a billionth of a second will last for something like 20,000 years!
     
  19. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    So when did the energy enter the universe?
     
  20. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    About 32 years after spacetime expansion, just as Dr. Wolf has explained to me before... Though we might differ on the time delay, because i have seen you qoute another time. Even if your time is correct, i am open to accept it, if it makes our mutual understandings easier to intercept.
     
  21. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Well, there are baryons in the universe within the first second---we can test this, and have, using WMAP, which pretty much PROVES the standard dogma about baryogenesis. So any energy which enters the universe has to come in before we see matter.
     
  22. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    I never knew this INTERPRETATION.

    Because, let us both face it, that is all they are. I just provided a new interpretation, and made sure it was as scientifically plausible as the next, and even more plausible than the theory we tolerate at the moment.
     
  23. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    But i need to ask...

    ''wat do you mean see?''

    I am assuming that no one was around to see this matter enter the universe.
     

Share This Page