Cosmic inflation:' did the early cosmos balloon in size? A mirror universe going backwards in time may be a simpler explanation

[Admin]

We live in a golden age for learning about the universe. Our most powerful telescopes have revealed that the cosmos is surprisingly simple on the largest visible scales.

Cosmic inflation:' did the early cosmos balloon in size? A mirror universe going backwards in time may be a simpler explanation : Read more

 

[Ray Gunn]

In my opinion, this is analogous to the cyclical universe idea, but from a more interesting, and possibly more meaningful perspective. Instead of an endless cycle of big bangs and crunches with no clear beginning, we start from a point where the universe has no measurable size, and the expansion occurs or moves in both temporal directions.

However, I'm not sure if we should view this scenario as two mirror universes, or simply as a single universe observed at two temporal points on either side of a "starting gate."

Take this a step further. Would the time dimension necessarily be a 2-sided "straight arrow" or could it instead be a circle? If it were a circle, then if you move far enough along the time dimension in either of the two directions, you would return to the origin point. That would again lead to a cyclical universe, but one in which events repeat themselves.

We already knew that gravity could theoretically lead to a closed universe where, if we traveled far enough in space, we would return to our origin point. So perhaps we could also travel far enough in either direction of time and also return to our starting point?

 

[Unclear Engineer]

I had read this article earlier. Interesting. Not necessarily real. But at least it is showing that people are still trying to "think outside the box" that the BBT has become.

Trying to think about the potential for reality of a mirror universe, filled with antimatter going backward in time, is sort of mind-boggling. (But, so is quantum mechanics.)

At least the theory does not seem to rely on the interaction of the two mirrored universes for anything other than the origin point.

But, I am not so sure that finding a massless neutrino exists would help prove this theory any more than some other theories.

Neutrino mass theories seem to have a lot of the physics equivalence to voodoo. See https://neutrinos.fnal.gov/mysteries/mass-ordering/

 

[Gibsense]

[url=https://postimages.org/][/URL] The edges of the semi-circles (the lines) represent 3D space the blue and yellow infilling represents nothing (just differentiate between old and new). This is not a cyclic situation but a continuous (ing) situation. It may apply to the universe or to simply a black hole/ white hole. Or maybe, at the end of a closed universe, they are the same thing and therefore cyclic.

I'll post here the explanation re our assumption of a flat universe as measured by wrongly assuming our time progresses in the same direction everywhere: In a closed universe it does not - it is at right angles to space and therefore time points in different directions depending on location.

The diagram explains this although the title should read Spherelander rather than Flatlander (Cats D+)
[url=https://postimages.org/][/URL]

 

[Atlan0001]

Past (future) histories (t=+1) --> door-window closed --> (t=0) REALTIME NOW (t=0) <-- door-window open -- future (past) histories (t=-1).

1.) Past (future) histories (t=+1): Probable histories [at-a-distance] always observed. Histories closed door-window point finite.
2.) Future (past) histories (t=-1): Probable histories [at-a-distance] un-observed . . . always yet to observed. Histories open door-window infinities. Destinations, infinities of un-observable (from any distance) finite arrival points.
3.) Distances opened between 1 and 2 have to be contracted (accelerated in contraction) and closed (at t=0) for any arrival.

 

[Gibsense]

In my opinion, this is analogous to the cyclical universe idea, but from a more interesting, and possibly more meaningful perspective. Instead of an endless cycle of big bangs and crunches with no clear beginning, we start from a point where the universe has no measurable size, and the expansion occurs or moves in both temporal directions.

However, I'm not sure if we should view this scenario as two mirror universes, or simply as a single universe observed at two temporal points on either side of a "starting gate."

Agreed. The word 'Backward' should be replaced with 'opposite' as both are positive just opposite directions 'going forward' (as would be the case in a closed universe)

 

[Ryan F. Mercer]

Well that's a whole lot of conjecture by someone with a predetermined conclusion to reject inflation. Would be more helpful if they offered ways to test their outlandish theory. Here's a real jewel: "..at this point the best we can do is think of the mirror universe as a mathematical device..." So it's not even real? Okay, I'm done reading.

 

[Classical Motion]

I believe it to be quite simple. There is and can only be one emptiness. And the simple +e and -e is all there is, in this emptiness. That’s all the physicality there is. It’s the only common part of our realities.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Well that's a whole lot of conjecture by someone with a predetermined conclusion to reject inflation. Would be more helpful if they offered ways to test their outlandish theory. Here's a real jewel: "..at this point the best we can do is think of the mirror universe as a mathematical device..." So it's not even real? Okay, I'm done reading.

That's pretty harsh, considering that the BBT also has a lot of conjecture and mathematical devices - "inflation" being a major one. And, Inflation does not explain what happened to all of the antimatter that would be needed to balance the baryonic matter that we can see,

I am not going to stop reading other conjectures on the basis that they are not proven, because the best we have is not proven, either - actually pretty far from it.

My suspicion is that we are probably misunderstanding something very important, so I welcome people who try to think about things with a minimum of preconceived assumptions.

That doesn't mean that I am going to jump on their bandwagons and tout their ideas, just that I will listen without prejudice.