Parallel Universes

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mvisvitae

Guest
Are there such things as Parallel Universes and do we exist in 6 of them at the same time?
 
N

newtonian

Guest
mvisvitae - No, in my belief - though it makes for interesting Sci Fi movies. <br /><br />There is no proof for this - but there was an interesting article in Scientific American on it.<br /><br />Alas, I am past sleep time, so I will bow to other posters to comment in detail.<br /><br />However, note that the Bible often uses "heaven" in plurall - there is no word for universe, with its singular prefix, in the Bible. In contrast, however, the Bible indicates only one soul is ypu. One can have many universe without having parallel universes.<br /><br />Also parallel mathematically is more likely than what you are referring to.<br /><br />If there are many universes within a much larger universe, some can be travelling parallel without being related in any other way than direction of travel withing that much larger universe.<br /><br />And, in String theory there can be many other dimensions and universes. 5-dimensional life, if it exists, would have trouble contacting us in our 3-d universe, for example. <br /><br />They would probably find it easier if they established connection at a certain point of with a certain 3-d object.<br /><br />I prefer not to pursue that further - since it gets into spritistic phenomena which is a dangerous subject to research. <br /><br />Just note, though, that life in other universes can be radically different than ours - e.g,. they could be energy based (rather than mater based) or involve many dimensions or both.<br /><br />There is scientific basis for believing in the existence of more than one universe - but this is still theoretical physics- not based on actual observations.
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
i recently watched a movie on the pbs channel about the string theory and it went into detail about the 11 different dimentions that exist! so i do beleive that we could live in them!
 
M

maxkitty

Guest
i think i know what show you're talking about. i saw it about a year ago with my father and by the end of it we both just looked at each other and said "huh?"<br /><br />i've watched it about seven or eight times sence and i still dont understand it! i'd also LOVE for someone smarter then me to explain it <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> that show absolutely facsinates me!!!<br /><br />
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />i think i know what show you're talking about. i saw it about a year ago with my father and by the end of it we both just looked at each other and said "huh?" <br /><br />i've watched it about seven or eight times sence and i still dont understand it! i'd also LOVE for someone smarter then me to explain it that show absolutely facsinates me!!! </font><br /><br />Are you referring to The Elegant Universe with Brian Greene? I would suggest that you go to your local bookstore, and pick up the book for $16. Then the ninth time you view the program, you'll understand it. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Be forwarned, that the book is 447 pages long!<br />String Theory can't be explained easily, because it involves General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics; it has to be studied.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
Excellent series and excellent book. I agree with Kyle_Baron... go buy the book. Don't string theory intimidate you. The book is actually a fairly easy read. There's plenty in there I don't understand, but I understand why I don't understand it (if that makes any sense). Greene does an excellent job of using the technical aspects (for those that understand it) and blending it fairly seamlessly with his layman explanations for the rest of us. Even if you have a passing interest in string theory, I highly recommend it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
A

alokmohan

Guest
Upto this time parallel universes are myth.But we have scope to verify if there is worm hole.
 
Y

yevaud

Guest
Ah, I regret not. Wormholes, while theoretically permissable, would be tiny, smaller than an atom.<br /><br />The efficacy of String Theory is as follows: a standard physical theory is dependant on four and only four dimensions: three physical and the fourth in time.<br /><br />Early last century (1921), two gentlemen named Kaluza and Klein wondered what could be done if "extra" (physical) dimensions were folded into a theory. And the results were very interesting: aspects of modern physics simplified somewhat with an added dimension, and it became clear that it provided a method for explaining the gravitational force and electromagnetism in the same equation. It was only partially successful, but pointed the way towards a new goal.<br /><br />Later on, in the 1970's, Yang and Mills did the same thing (guage theory), but vastly improved, unifying the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces all in one equation. Yang-Mills is, btw, one of the bedrock basics of the standard model.<br /><br />But the problem was gravity. To explain gravity as a force as with the other three, it had to be quantized, e.g., emitted as discreet packets of energy, and propogate in certain ways. However, every theory until String Theory provides nonsense answers when you try to quantize gravity - infinities, which clearly cannot be correct.<br /><br />String Theory manages, by the inclusion of 10 or 11 dimensions (depending on the theory, now currently believed to be 11), to include gravity in a grand unification of all 4 forces, and it does not provide nonsense answers with respect to gravity.<br /><br />This is a simple an answer as I can give you as to extra dimensions and String Theory. Hope this helps.<br /><br />(This would now hare off into guage theory, perturbation theory, and the difficulty in determining which set of conditions are the correct ones in String Theory, so I'll stop here) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>
 
H

harmonicaman

Guest
The Large Hadron Collider is a "Telescope", of sorts, and when it goes online in late 2007 it may answer some important cosmological questions such as:<br /><br />1. Is the popular Higgs mechanism for generating elementary particle masses in the Standard Model, violated? If not, how many Higgs bosons are there, and what are their masses?<br /><br />2. Will the more precise measurements of the masses of baryons continue to be mutually consistent within the Standard Model?<br /> <br />3. Do particles have supersymmetric ("SUSY") partners?<br /><br />4. Why are there violations of the symmetry between matter and antimatter? <br /><br />5. <b>Are there extra dimensions, as predicted by various models inspired by string theory, and can we "see" them?</b><br /><br />6. <b>What is the nature of the 96% of the universe's mass which is unaccounted for by current astronomical observations?</b> <br /><br />7. Why is gravity so many orders of magnitude weaker than the other three fundamental forces? <br />
 
Y

yevaud

Guest
As the joke goes, "My GUT's are better than your GUT's." <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Oh hell, one more then. Someone (I don't remember who) noted that a Grand Unified Theory via SuperSymmetry would be (*Ahem*):<br /><br /><b>SUSYGUTS</b> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>
 
S

search

Guest
NASA is not the boss in this case but if you want to know how USA is cooperating with CERN LHC here it is:<br /> <br />The US part of Large Hadron Collider program (US LHC) consists of contributions of Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL), Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL), and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) to the design and supply of identified essential equipment for the accelerator. <br /><br />
 
A

alokmohan

Guest
The process starts from 2007.I understand upto 4th dimension.But 11 dimension.I feel dizzy.
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<font color="yellow"><br />String Theory manages, by the inclusion of 10 or 11 dimensions (depending on the theory, now currently believed to be 11), to include gravity in a grand unification of all 4 forces, and it does not provide nonsense answers with respect to gravity. </font><br /><br />Just a guess, but do you (or anyone else) think that we can combine the 11 dimensions into 2-4 (space and time) dimensions? One being a matter dimension with time (ours), and the other, an antimatter dimension with anti (different) time. The remaining 3 dimensions would be a spacial dimension, infinite in size, with no time, and containing the 2-4 (space and time) dimensions, within one universe. Just speculating, but is that possible?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
A

alokmohan

Guest
We can wish another I using the SDC in another univese.We may have anti cally as mere star and YOU AS TIMELADY.Keep on thinking .
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
Hi Alokmohan. Chew on this for awhile: Do you have electrons(-1) in your body? If so, it's antimatter particle is called a positron(+1). ALL MATTER has antimatter particles, down to the size of a quark.<br /><br />In my previous post, I should have eliminated the word "universes" and just kept the word dimensions. In otherwords, our matter dimension, and it's antimatter dimension, exist within the same universe. Sorry for leading you astray. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> I've edited my previous post to reflect this change. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts