Do parallel universes exist? We might live in a multiverse.

[Admin]

There are a few good theories for a multiverse — an infinite number of parallel universes besides our own.

Do parallel universes exist? We might live in a multiverse. : Read more

 

[Atlan0001]

One small item of contradiction to the illustrations of bubble universes, as well as part of the text. It's called "boundarylessness". I take it to mean you can't bump your face into a wall of bubble such as the illustrations and a part of the text suggests.

"Boundarylessness", to me means that bubble universes offset. They overlay and inlay into one another (of course not exactly except for those infinities of absolute duplicates at infinite distances apart; in which case there is no difference in and between them from an absolute of just "one and one only"), thus an infinitely flat (infinitely flat (infinite in depth of plane(s), infinite in extent -- "dimensionless point"), smooth, non-local, non-relative, 'naked singularity' of 'Space-verse' Big Universe (U).

"Boundarylessness", herein, also means "horizon": horizon, to horizon, to horizon. In this case it means its there at a distance from you, while at exactly the same time you exist inside it; in the exact middle of it between horizon that always remains constant to you in every direction no matter what direction you travel; no matter how fast you travel. You're inside it, and it is inside you. So you travel through offset bubbles, losing relativity, gaining relativity. Relativity breaking down behind, relativity building ahead. You do it all the time, walking room to room, or any other place to any other place; inter-planet, inter-planetary, inter-stellar, inter-galactic, or inter-universe. Offset to offset, to offset.

Don't let those illustrations throw you. Or, if you must think of them the way they are illustrated, think interconnections by wormholes between them all (a filament connected matrix to infinity rather than loose bubbles floating so loosely and so completely disconnected from each other).... in the place of simply horizon to horizon to horizon, through infinities of horizons looking and being closed up to just one collapsed 'Horizon'. There is more than one way to skin a "Multiverse".

 

[rod]

We have quite a number of reports now on the multiverse and eternal inflation Here is an earlier report by Alan Guth. Quantum Fluctuations in Cosmology and How They Lead to a Multiverse, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013arXiv1312.7340G/abstract, December 2013.

The paper provides a scale for inflation and the present universe size to compare. "From the end of inflation to today the universe would expand by another factor of ∼ 10^15 GeV/3K ≈ 10^27. This means that a distance scale of 1 m today corresponds to a length of only about 10^−53 m at the start of inflation, 18 orders of magnitude smaller than the Planck length (∼ 10^−35 m)."

That is something to ponder 10^-53 m and now the universe expanded to some 93 billion light years in diameter, https://phys.org/news/2021-03-myths-big.html, Five myths about the Big Bang 22-Mar-2021, "That which we call the observable universe is a bubble surrounding us that is 93 billion light-years in diameter."

Applying the scale where 1 meter today = 10^-53 m at the start, we have the universe begin ~ 8.8 x 10^-27 m size and expand to ~ 8.8 x 10^26 m size today in 13.8 billion years, ~ 4.352 x 10^17 seconds. How much of the expansion rate and changes, multiverse, and eternal inflation is directly observable like the Galilean moons at Jupiter are today or stellar parallax measurements?

I note this in the interesting report by space.com.

"Some physicists believe in a flatter version of multiple universes. That is, if the universe that we live in goes on forever, there are only so many ways that the building blocks of matter can arrange themselves as they assemble across infinite space. Eventually, any finite number of particle types must repeat a particular arrangement. Hypothetically, in a big enough space, those particles must repeat arrangements as large as entire solar systems and galaxies. So, your entire life might be repeated elsewhere in the universe, down to what you ate for breakfast yesterday. At least, that's the theory. But if the universe began at a finite point, as nearly every physicist agrees that it did, an alternate version of you likely doesn't exist, according to astrophysicist Ethan Siegel's 2015 Medium article."

So it seems we have no beginning, no end, and endless abiogenesis events creating potential new versions of you and I in cosmology now

 

[Helio]

Some nits, FWIW...

Some researchers studying models of the universe speculate that the universe's diameter could be 7 billion light-years across.

This diameter looks odd.

...everything we know of was an infinitesimal singularity.

A Noble prize awaits demonstrable evidence of a single true singularity. Physics equations go to pieces at the precipice of those suppositional points, as I understand.

Some researchers base their ideas of parallel universes on quantum mechanics, the mathematical description of subatomic particles.

. Yes, “ideas”, which sometimes are precursors to theories, which require claims one can falsify. Math and physics aren’t the same. Math can offer descriptions of things that may not exist.

To call other patently unobservable universes “theories” is great sizzle but no steak. Fun to consider, and maybe fruitful someday, but...

[iPhone]

 

[Atlan0001]

Some nits, FWIW...

This diameter looks odd.
A Noble prize awaits demonstrable evidence of a single true singularity. Physics equations go to pieces at the precipice of those suppositional points, as I understand.

. Yes, “ideas”, which sometimes are precursors to theories, which require claims one can falsify. Math and physics aren’t the same. Math can offer descriptions of things that may not exist.

To call other patently unobservable universes “theories” is great sizzle but no steak. Fun to consider, and maybe fruitful someday, but...

[iPhone]

"To call other patently unobservable universes "theories" is great sizzle but no steak."-- not sure what you mean by that but I can give you one unobservable universe in fact. Maybe three.

The sun is eight light minutes from Earth. That is minus (-) 8 minutes "observable universe". The 'unobservable universe' is that (-)8 minutes (+)8 minutes to 't'= 0. The Centauri System is approximately four light years from Earth. That is (-) 4 years "observable universe". The 'unobservable universe' is approximately (-)4 years (+)4 years to 't' = 0. Andromeda is approximately 2.2 million light years from Earth. That is (-)2.2 million years "observable universe". The 'unobservable universe' is approximately (-)2.2 million years (+)2.2 millions years to 't' = 0. This patently "unobservable universe," is no theory. Or better yet, if someone wants to see it this way, these "patently unobservable universes" are no "theories".

 

[Catastrophe]

"Real scientific theory explores, and in some cases supports, the case for universes outside, parallel to, or distant from but mirroring our own."

Real scientific theory? or Imaginative mathematics? ?

Cat

 

[rod]

Post #5 uses light-time effect to suggest support for observing other universes it seems that are not observed or measured today. I note this comment made about the Sun. "The sun is eight light minutes from Earth. That is minus (-) 8 minutes "observable universe". The 'unobservable universe' is that (-)8 minutes (+)8 minutes to 't'= 0. "

Using my telescope with glass white light solar filter, on 07-June near 1400 UT, I observed these 3 active region sunspots reported by spaceweather.com. AR2829, AR2830, and AR2827 near the solar limb at 53x views. Much fun and enjoyable time. However, light-time effect does not allow me to observe some other alternate universe or alternate reality with a different Sun and perhaps the same sunspots in different areas on it or another group of sunspots. In the multiverse there could be 10^500 different universes. Who knows how many different Suns and sunspot groups could be in all the other universes concurrent with my 07-June-2021 solar observation However, concerning my solar observations on 07-June, I am 100% confident of those sunspots observed and the Sun I could see. They were there, at least 8 minutes earlier than when I could see them in my eyepiece based upon light-time effect

 

[Helio]

The sun is eight light minutes from Earth. That is minus (-) 8 minutes "observable universe". The 'unobservable universe' is that (-)8 minutes (+)8 minutes to 't'= 0.

Yes, and the reason we all know how much time has expired is because.... it comes from observations. The "observable Universe" includes space and time and everything within BBT plus that which has already passed from our view that fits within the physics equations when it was tiny, I suppose.

 

[Atlan0001]

Yes, and the reason we all know how much time has expired is because.... it comes from observations. The "observable Universe" includes space and time and everything within BBT plus that which has already passed from our view that fits within the physics equations when it was tiny, I suppose.

Trying to observe the unobservable simultaneous universe, i.e. 'Space-verse', out to distances as far as 13.8 billion x 6 trillion miles is exactly like trying to observe a principle of ever increasing uncertainty in Quantum Mechanics: Is 13.8 billion light years in fact (-)13.8 billion years? And not only that, does what is observed to be (-)13 billion years, add (+)13.8 billion years, in the case of a universe (u) ever in vortex at ever increasing distances from anywhere, in fact actually come out to 't' = 0? The sun, yes. Centauri, yes. Even Andromeda, close enough to almost be indistinguishable from, but not quite yes. The 'Time-verse' universe at 13.8 billion light years from Earth, regarding the 'Space-verse' simultaneous universe at 13.8 billion x 6 trillion miles from Earth? No way! Nothing like! Like an energetic cell of life or whatever, a division or fission into two or more. Another bubble universe altogether -- and probably more than one -- from the Earth's!

 

[Helio]

Trying to observe the unobservable simultaneous universe, i.e. 'Space-verse', out to distances as far as 13.8 billion x 6 trillion miles is exactly like trying to observe a principle of ever increasing uncertainty in Quantum Mechanics: Is 13.8 billion light years in fact (-)13.8 billion years? And not only that, does what is observed to be (-)13 billion years, add (+)13.8 billion years, in the case of a universe (u) ever in vortex at ever increasing distances from anywhere, in fact actually come out to 't' = 0? The sun, yes. Centauri, yes. Even Andromeda, close enough to almost be indistinguishable from, but not quite yes. The 'Time-verse' universe at 13.8 billion light years from Earth, regarding the 'Space-verse' simultaneous universe at 13.8 billion x 6 trillion miles from Earth? No way! Nothing like! Like an energetic cell of life or whatever, a division or fission into two or more. Another bubble universe altogether -- and probably more than one -- from the Earth's!

Yet, we observe the CMBR from ~ 13.8 billion years ago. But for galaxies, of course the accuracy of the observations for those more distant galaxies, seen via gravity lenses for instance, will be much less than for our own Sun or other objects nearby.

 

[Atlan0001]

Yet, we observe the CMBR from ~ 13.8 billion years ago. But for galaxies, of course the accuracy of the observations for those more distant galaxies, seen via gravity lenses for instance, will be much less than for our own Sun or other objects nearby.

I suspect that in 13.8 billion years from now advanced beings will "observe the CMBR from -- 13.8 billion years ago." I also suspect that in 13.8 trillion years from then, advanced beings will "observe the CMBR from -- 13.8 billion years ago" (their observation).

More, I suspect that 13.8 billion years ago advanced beings observed "the CMBR from -- 13.8 billion years ago" (their observation). And, I suspect that 13.8 trillion years ago advanced beings observed "the CMBR from -- 13.8 billion years ago" (their observation).