The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: A New Interpretation to the Big Bang - The Big Flux  (Read 1506 times)

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory

The Big Flow Theory

(Flux in the definition of ''flow'')

What of any cyclic opportunities for the universe if the beginning is conceptually the same as the end through complimentarity and the Leibniz Time Association? It is possible that since we know the big bang happened, and as far as we can tell, must have happened for some reason, and also considering that
if the end was as true as the beginning itself, then might the end be the beginning of something more? The cyclic universe theories have been around for centuries, as long as Hindiusm has been around, and if one can intimately tie together the past and the future, where present time events have created
and destroyed, then maybe even these contexts can be taken to be the same. I propose a theory.

It has been believed by many that the multiple universe theory of physics (which unfortunately incorporates the timelessness theory of physics) can provide satisfactory conlusions about the funamental laws of nature and the evolution of physical events. It's even been applied to the human psyche by a
few physicists as well... but in the theory, i won't except an infinite amount of universes which the original Everette interpretation involved. I don't appreciate the multiverse theory nearly enough actually, but in this theory i will apply it to the idea's, just to keep some diversity about this.
But don't be at too ease. There is one major part of this theory where a physicist will either agree or disagree.

From quantum cosmology theories, it is possible to interpret how the universe will end depending on what energy .state it began in. Ignoring the many details which follow this area of research, it is possible that a universe that begins in its excited state can spill out its energy to a parallel universe
which is just beginning (it's own big bang) in a ground state. A ground state universe is quite stable, but one which is in an excited form will quantum leap into a new configuration. If one was to take relativity theory seriously, then the disappearance of matter and energy would envoke the disappearance
of space and time itself. The death of this universe is then the ''supplier'' of energy and mass for the newly born universe. It's like imagining a game of pass the parcel, where in this game, two universes share the parcel of energy and a field vector of space and time. The death of one of these universes
means the instantaneous, or nearly instantaneous appearance of the new universe.

In this theory, there is no need for more than one universe at a time, and could extend to share energies an infinite amount of times, the only way i would appreciate an infinite amount of universes, so long as they don't exist alongside our own universe simultaneous in their own present time frames (this
is due to the self-consistency principle of quantum mechanics). But you could also deal with a finite amount of universes too, i would say around [latex]10^{100}[/latex] should suffice. They could theoretically share information in the form of energy and matter for the rest of eternity, all existing, but never
simultaneously. This would enhance the religious importances in living life more than once. These universes are completely self-consistent, and can only be run by the Pilot Wave Theory. The reason why, is because if you remove the existences of other universes existing side-by-side our own, then there is no need
to use them to answer for the wave function of matter. Instead, you'd be allowed to use the Pilot Wave Theory (the theory which states at big bang, the wave function was collapsed, and the apparent wave function is already predetermined in what state it will end up in). So now we have a finite amount of universes,
each with an infinite amount of beginnings and ends with an important role in the wave function: This role is that the oberved wave functions we measure are the statistical averages that will sum up the new universe created when the old universe passes away. This mean everytime a universe begins the wave function
even though already determined ''collapsed-wise'', it still measures up the possibilities that will arise in the universe to come.

The One-Universe at a Time model allows to bring back the importance of this universe, and also solves the problem to why this universe arose and why no other arose... it's because they are still to pop into existence, like they have been since an infinite amount of time. There may not even be an infinite amount of
time required, as you are allowed to believe that at one point these universes did have some beginning. To allow this, you must understand that since there is only one universe in existence at a time, waiting to necromance another universe in its death, if there was some initial beginning, it must have also have arisen
with only one universe. The death of the first universe (we will call the Mother-universe *which is probably the most probable universe that was first chosen*) eventually underwent a quantum leap, and squeezed its energy and mass from this universe possibly ending in some singularity and this energy entered the second
universe, which would be a process lasting for what would seem like forever, until the energy is finally shared among all the universes, and then returns back to the Mother Universe. Assuming these universes are consistently the same par the few quantum mistakes you would inevitably find in multiple universe theory,
(1), then they will live for exactly the same amount of time. This is because sharing the same amount of matter and energy between universes would result in the same kind of geometry which would lead to a specific death of the universe, and hypothetically within the same time, apart from those maverik worlds where time
can oscillate.

(1) - Note, we can really no longer call it parallel universe theory, because the universes are not parallel to us at all. Also note they would need to encorporate three dimensions at least. The reason why is because the initiation of energy from one universe to another would require the other universe to have the same
dimensions or more, or (one less) such as time. Matter and energy according to relativity exists in this three dimensional vacuum, not as seperate objects, but of the same physical vacuum. The same kind of physical matter and energy being shared would require equally a physical vacuum with a similar discription as our
own... so this allows the many-dimension universes as theorized by string theory enthusiasts. 

So there's my theory in a nutshell. The statements concluded from this theory are satisfying because:

1) It does allow for other universes to exist.
2) It imposes a special point to our universe, as it exists and none other during its own time.
3) That even with an amount of 10^{100} universes, they are all unique because they all exist alone.
4) The question of why we are here turns out to be irrelevent since many forms of universes are yet to exist.
5) It means that the wave function does represent the information of other universes, just not real actions existing alongside our own universe creating new universes along the way.
6) So it creates a distinction in the meaning of the wave function in matter acting as information that is dormant until the egnition of the newly born universe.
7) It also uses Pilot Wave Theory to initiate the idea that the wave function is not implying the creation or mirror-representation of objects in other universes.
8) And finally, it allows physics to be concerned about this universe alone, because any attempt to know how universes will unravel due to the dormant information in the wave function is inherently useless and doomed.

But is the theory really fussy in detail? Think of the alternative, which is not much better; you have an infinity of universes which are born from each physical movement of every physical object in this universe. Every quantum object in the universe would have these universes fly apart, creating new universes from the
possibilities given to it. As i once showed before, the famous coin example (i think first created by Fred Hoyle) attempts to show you its obsurdities. Flip a coin 100 times and you will create a little over [latex]10^{30}[latex] universes. Triple this, and you have more quantum universes appearing than what you would find
from every single statistical average in the universe, which constists of around 10^{80} particles, give or take a few tens. That means if you tripled the amount of times you flipped the coin, you would create more universes than what all the particles in the universe could in one instant.

So with this theory, you can accept that each physical action has the ability to spawn universes from the potential, or you could accept the fussiness of my theory, encorporating a finite amount of universes, sharing energy, space, matter and time infinitely, but never two universes existing at once.

I think its time to admit, i don't personally believe my theory. I'm quite content with the notion that we have only one universe, where time is real, and the complimentary past and future combined with my Assocation Principle in Time using the Leibniz Law are simply states where in relativity it would have the beginning
and the end curved in time (a curved time-like path) binded with the beginning. A curved Timelike Universe where the beginning and end are essentially the same as the temporal definition of ''the present moment''.

The Dimensions of Spacetime

A big thing in physics right now is the idea that, when we speak of space (the three spatial dimensions) and the one imaginary dimension of space we call time, we might be talking about them as the only dimensions this universe contains. The Theory of multiple spatio and temporal dimensions has become a big topic in string
theory and the multiverse theory, both declaring possible solutions to the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. It was properly developed into relativity in the theory of Kaluza Klein, where a fifth dimension of spacetime, electromagentic in property existed alongside the more obvious dimensions. With the uprising
string theories, formulated early in the 70's began to develop some of the most complicated mathematical theories ever brought into the world of physics. The exhausting energy put into the string theories have led to a point where we could have possibly 11 dimensions in total, or maybe 26 according to a Bosonic String Theory.
These dimensions are not visible, simply because they are far too small. Too small even for experimentation so far to varify their existences.

These tiny, curled up dimensions could act like little doors into other universes, and string theory has proposed that the fundamental particle of gravity the Graviton might be able to freely move through these little doors and drift through universes. Ultimately the theory does have a grand design. Out of around [latex]10^{500}[/latex]
universes, possible by a String Theory Landscape, has all of these universes stringed together to make one massive super-string. One thing that has been added to certain theories of string theory and relativity is the addition of an extra time dimension.

What are the consequences of having an extra dimension of time? We know for certain if there is another, we don't experience it very well, nor does it falter the order and procession of events in which we experience them. Under rules of Everettes Multiple Universe Theory, or the Many Worlds Theory as it has also come under as, or more
popularly the Multiverse Theory, we can have universes with time in many different forms. Some universes might have an oscillating time dimension, so at one time it flows forward and then suddenly changes to move backwards. There will be some universes which began in their Omega Points, and time essentially would be moving back from the
Omega Point straight to the Alpha Point (the singularity). Some universes will have two dimensions of time, and would require that you had two watches on your wrist.

From the USC College, physicist Itzhak Bars has pioneered research to discern how a second dimension of time could better explain the laws of the universe. He has shown in his work that having an extra time dimension i costly. You also need an additional space dimension. Interestingly enough, Bars does have a consistent reason why one might
want to invoke a second time dimension. The reason why, is because due to the uncertainty principle. Since position and momentum differ because momentum requires velocity, and also noting that due to uncertainty, the velocity and position can not be known simultaneously to a great degree, having the velocity work with a time dimension is consistent
with the mathematics, as much as it is when making momentum and velocity indestinguishable as to raise the idea that they require their own unique time dimensions. Put in his own words,

“If I make position and momentum indistinguishable from one another, then something is changing about the notion of time,” Bars explains, “If I demand a symmetry like that, I must have an extra time dimension.”

Bars mathematical work has so far gone to explain a strange world, where six dimensions exists: Two time dimensions, three and plus one space extra for the added time dimension. The description of his work reminds me a lot of Plato's Cave Analogy and corresponds to recent physics devlopments in understanding The Holographic Principle. In Bar's math,
the matter and energy is more like a two dimensionsional wall displaying shadows strangely enough in a three-dimensional space. He even went as far as to show that he was able to eliminate the need for the axion in the Standard Particle Model of physics, however recent information shows that perhaps the axion has already been found [1].

The Two-Time Dimension Theories, or ''F-Theory'' as it has been currently dubbed in string theory where space has eleven dimensions and two of time, have been around for a while. It was also suggested from a philosophical viewpoint by J. W. Dunne in 1927 in ''An Experiment wit Time,'' that there may be an infinite amount of time dimensions as associated
to every individual conscious mind [2]. To a degree, i actually agree with this. Whilst i personally have never admired a completely a solipsistic view of reality, unless one was to take the following quite literally: If we were not here, then reality as we know it would cease to exist. Now, since that's purely logic, it would also ammount to being logical
to assume that if this is the case, then we never really interact with the outside world, but what we observe is but a representation of the outside world created by the nueral network of the brain. In effect, the reality we ever come to experience literally is the one we create. Now, in this case, you can argue since that the experience of the observer
is individual and unique among different humans, then their experiences of time are seperate, and then envokes the existence of individual time dimensions. The experience of time is certainly important to the model of physics if one requires to initiate every detail in the vacuum; what is more interesting is that this involves two different kinds of time.
The time we associate to experience, and the time external of our experiences, the time wich ''objectively'' exists everywhere.

So, i agree that we have an experience of different times, and these times may beg a description of their own because of their individual natures, they are still part of the invariant imaginary dimension of space. The invariance i speak of allows us to associate with time, the time we all come to experience (we call this asymptotic time). If every mind
truely did experience seperate time dimensions, we would need to ask in what relevence this has, and whether the infinite amount of them should seem superfluous. Truth is, these dimensions don't really take up any space, mind the pun. They are purely subliminal since we are referring to the conscious experience, and our world is not a real three dimensional
world as explained not long ago... it's a strange sequence of electrical signals interpreted into information, and we see this information as though it was a real space, feeling as though it existed in a real time. But it's zero-dimensional, through-and-through, so you could take as many of these infinite amount of time dimensions and it would not cost any space
to store them in. It's quite safe to say, whilst our ''perception'' is generated from matter and energy, even space, it is still a perception that does not exist in the space it seems to be generated from.

What we are observing effectively turns out to be holographic in nature. You could then go as far as to say every consciousness is a unique dimension of its own, a superdimension hanging off the ordinary dimensions of space, but this is purely hypothetical. To be honest, i feel one should only be concerned about multiple time dimensions if one is willing to
describe more than one consciousness at a time, and maybe even apply it relativistically. But when in general dealing with the unification of physics, one dimension of time to describe all can suffice; or at least, it should. If anything, adding an infinite amount of time dimensions due to consciousness seems very complicated. Doctor Fred Alan Wolf might himself
prefer this idea. Using an essay Physicist Ludvic Bass (once a student of Schrodinger) showed how there can only be one consciousness ever, and this is pureluy based on physics. If this is true, then not only one time dimension in the Final Theory will suffice, but also one consciousness as well!

[1] - This is the many-minds model of parallel universes.

[2] - The work entitled ''An Experiment with Time,'' was actually one large essay. It studied the subjects of precognition and the human experience of time, which in my particular model of geometric model of spacetime would call this the Relative Time Experience. His theory also corresponds to the work shown in essay one where the only real time is the present time,
and he explains how time, that is past and future are eternally present. I was personally more surprised to find out he also agreed with the notion that two descriptions of time and essentially two natures of time could exist. I personally find the description essential in adapting some understanding of why we experience time the way we do, and the way time is when
we don't.


The Naked Scientists Forum


SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums