[Skelm (OP)]

Right i am a music producer and a novice here to physics. As i understand the wave particle duality then the prediction of an electron is depicted as  cloud and how quantum tunneling works is that the electron will eventually be where its least likely to exist hence crossing over.
So if there is wave particle duality then what about the prediction of the wave behavior passing through our universe to the outside of the universe and would that predict where the particle would exist out side of our universe?

[Kryptid]

I don't think there is any evidence that the probability plot of an electron extends outside of the Universe. Or any particle for that matter.

[Skelm (OP)]

I don't think there is any evidence that the probability plot of an electron extends outside of the Universe. Or any particle for that matter.

Right what i am talking about would actually only exist with gravitons no? as gravitons would be the only (hypothetical) particle to be able to pass through into and out of any universe and dimension or time line correct? i was say in the same way as quantum tunneling but in this way?

[graham.d]

Quantum tunnelling is more that a particle, such as an electron, has a certain probability of being on the other side of a potential barrier. It is like a car on one side of a mountain, but without enough fuel to get to the top and over the mountain, can sometimes appear at a similar altitude on the other side of the mountain. It is as thoughit had "tunnelled" through it. And it's potential energy does not need to change. This is due to a particle not behaving like a, more familiar, car but having associated with it only a probability of position. This positional probability is spread over the whole universe but just weighted towards the "traditional" view.

There is no model, that I know of, for the view that such a probability could extend beyond the known universe. By definition of the word "universe" this cannot happen. But one can imagine a multiverse of self contained black holes so it is certainly possible to "think" of an outside view. Remember this is only one of many ideas and we have no way of knowing whether such a concept is valid or not. I don't think we have got so far with tying together quantum mechanics and cosmology to have any sort of model that relates the probability amplitude of an electron to the size of the universe (or knowable universe) but I expect there may well be some relationship.

Your questions go very deep and it is currently beyond human knowledge to answer I think. Certainly beyond mine :-)

[Madidus_Scientia]

"If you think you understand quantum theory, then you don't understand quantum theory." - Richard Feynman

[graham.d]

Exactly MS. Richard Feynman was a hero of mine. One of the people I would most like to have met, though I'm sure I would have been dumbstruck!

[Skelm (OP)]

K so If it would be probable to have an electron exist (the other side of the mountain lol) or as in the sun into another atom etc (i think thats how the suns basic reactions work) then what i am saying is this could pass over into another version in a multi verse model?
as i understand there are 3 types of universes flat, spherical and hyperbolic. so would all 3 of them exist as probabilities to maybe stabilize things out as ie a positive, negative and neutral?

if the universe is thought to be one big oscillating wave of a huge string as i have heard said then i think its highly probable that you would get and some very odd effects with quantum tunneling of which one i am about to post lol

[graham.d]

This is a huge subject!!! The multiverse concept I suggested was one based on our known universe being "closed" - finite but unbounded. The latest research indicates this may not fit with measurements. But who knows. The quantum mechanical concept of a multiverse is not the same as this (well nobody has suggested it is as far as I know), but to do with parallel coexistances of an infinite set of universes based on the outcome of quantum events - like one universe where a cat has died and another where it hasn't.

If you are going to get into string theory without the maths, I don't think it is possible to get very far at all. I'm afraid the maths is too hard for me too :-) There is a definite limit to understanding these subjects by association with things within our everyday experience. The brain never evolved to cope with anything more than 3D space and what we would expect macroscopic objects to behave like. At a certain point you need very advanced mathematics and hope that the resulting patterns in the equations give inspiration and insight. Perhaps this is a depressing view but experience suggests this to be so.

[Skelm (OP)]

This is a huge subject!!! The multiverse concept I suggested was one based on our known universe being "closed" - finite but unbounded. The latest research indicates this may not fit with measurements. But who knows. The quantum mechanical concept of a multiverse is not the same as this (well nobody has suggested it is as far as I know), but to do with parallel coexistances of an infinite set of universes based on the outcome of quantum events - like one universe where a cat has died and another where it hasn't.

If you are going to get into string theory without the maths, I don't think it is possible to get very far at all. I'm afraid the maths is too hard for me too :-) There is a definite limit to understanding these subjects by association with things within our everyday experience. The brain never evolved to cope with anything more than 3D space and what we would expect macroscopic objects to behave like. At a certain point you need very advanced mathematics and hope that the resulting patterns in the equations give inspiration and insight. Perhaps this is a depressing view but experience suggests this to be so.

Well yes the multi verse idea that quantum events effecting each multi verse as you said in each one something slightly different would have happened the way i see it in each different universe 1 string would not exist the next one 2 strings would not exist and on the other scale there would be a minimum of only 1 string existing in that model of things the way i see it and maybe even no strings existing which would be the 11th dimension (just a thought there)

as for actual universal models i should have corrected myself and not said "multi verse" i mean each one of those universal models could co exist as the same frame work of the same universal structure as the way i see things you need 3 versions of the same universe to balance things out and then a multi verse of each universe to further balance things out as then the way i see it that would constitute complete balance as a model.

any ideas at all on this?

[Soul Surfer]

To go back to your original question Skelm the answer is YES BUT.

The big but is you have to realise the scale over which this can occur.  As you realise Plancks constant is a really tiny number and quantum uncertainty at any reasonable probability exists only over tiny distances (of the vague order of the size of an atom)  Outside of this tiny distance the probability is so small (with possibly one exception) that it is not worth considering.  The exception could be the case of entangled particles.

You then move on to the problem of knowing where "outside" our universe is to be found as has been discussed above