This Forum is Closed
October 17, 2017, 07:00:13 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: GGF now has a permanent home: http://forum.globalgulag.com
 
  Home Help Search Links Staff List Login Register  

Last Night's "Through the Wormhole" Supports My Cosmology

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Last Night's "Through the Wormhole" Supports My Cosmology  (Read 122 times)
Bad Penny
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 327



View Profile
« on: June 16, 2011, 07:42:51 pm »


Here's a post of mine from a little over a year ago:


My New Physics Concept: Goodbye Hawking and Susskind?
« on: March 09, 2010, 09:25:57 PM »

I don't know if pure science (at its vaguest and most speculative, at that!) really belongs on the technology thread, but I couldn't find any more suitable.

What I'm presenting here is just a concept, not a theory, and I lack the mathematical knowledge (as well as the enormous amount of time) necessary to turn it into a theory.

I've just seen a television program about Hawking's Information Paradox and Susskind's attempted resolution of the same, and the idea occurred to me that one can resolve Hawking's and Susskind's theories by positing that the entire universe will one day be sucked into a single black hole, which will then disappear (per Hawking).  The disappearance of that ultimate black hole will constitute the Big Bang of a new universe, thus conserving all the information of the current universe (per Susskind (and vaguely similar to Hawking 2004)) in the next universe, just as my theory makes this universe the information storage and retrieval mechanism for a previous universe.  I might call this concept the "Oscillating SpaceTime Concept".

What does anybody think?

Edit:

In terms of string theory, the Black Hole Disappearance/Big Bang Event (and this would constitute a single event, not two events) would constitute the transfer of the information from one brane to another, such that the touching of the two neighbouring branes wouldn’t really constitute a “collision”, but would be the result of attraction of the recipient brane to the final collapse of the universe in the donor brane.  One corollary of this concept, then, is that a brane is not identical to its universe (or universes), but is a larger, independent structure, possibly of constant dimensions.

***

Anyways, last night's episode of "Through the Wormhole Morgan Freeman" featured the work of two physicists whose work supports the concept of multiple finite universes.

Jean-Pierre Luminet presented his idea of a dodecahedral universe, which accounts for the varying density of the Cosmic Background Radiation, except for one major cool spot.  Then, a woman whose name and institutional affiliation I didn't catch indicated that her theory (independently derived) explains the cool spot by positing the near approach of a neighboring universe in precisely that sector of the sky.

Finally, the show mentions three-dimensional branes, which concept I believe to be unnecessary as our tri-dimensional universe could just as easily be an holographic projection from a two-dimensional brane.
Report Spam   Logged

Are you taking over?
Or are you taking orders?
I ain't going backwards!
We're going only forwards!

The Clash, White Riot

Social Buttons



Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.08 seconds with 13 queries.