1. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666

    Is our universe the result of a collapse of higher-dimensional star?

    Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by jazzabel, Oct 16, 2013.

    A new paper published in the prestigious paper 'Nature' suggests that our Universe might just be the result of the 4d star collapsing into a black hole.
    http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743


    This is so exciting, and to me especially because when I first heard of black holes this was my first thought - that on the other side must be another universe. It was just a child's imagination, but as many other things, perhaps it's telling of an instinctive knowledge living things have?

    Does it mean that our own black holes are just portals into two-dimensional Universes with two-dimensional beings (perhaps the Mary Sues and Gary Stues :eek:) :p
     
    Andrae Smith likes this.
  2. KaTrian
    Offline

    KaTrian A foolish little beast. Staff Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    5,566
    Likes Received:
    3,563
    Location:
    The Great Swamp
    Black holes are cool, but I always kind of imagined they aren’t holes at all, they just stuff mass into a super-duper dense blob (like making a snowball really dense and hard before you throw it at an unsuspecting passer-by) :D

    I like the theory of a multiverse, and the idea that our universe big banged when another universe fell apart.

    I read this short story – and this must be the truth about the origins of our universe – in which, at the beginning, there was a sausage floating in nothingness. First it was really, really, really hot, but then cooled down. When the sausage was cool, some weird creature and its friends stopped by. Two of them ventured on the sausage, wondering what the hell it was, and when the other creature accidentally touched it with its head, the sausage sucked it in and then big banged into our universe.
     
  3. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    Hahhaha, sausage, that sounds so surreal. I see what you mean about the snowball. I always imagined black hole was a funnel with universes on either side :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
  4. Aled James Taylor
    Offline

    Aled James Taylor Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2013
    Messages:
    784
    Likes Received:
    462
    Location:
    UK
    In fiction, we are limited by our imaginations. I science there are no such limitations.

    I still can't get my head around radio waves. I can't imagine what one would look like if I could see them. Whatever I come up with, there's always some hard evidence that tells me I'm wrong. As for quantum physics .....

    Matter spontaneously creates itself, often in the form of wire coat hangers. Everyone has these but nobody buys them and shops don't even stock them!
     
  5. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    You know how they say :"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
    Very true about the coat hangers too. :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
    Andrae Smith likes this.
  6. mammamaia
    Offline

    mammamaia nit-picker-in-chief Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    19,316
    Likes Received:
    1,014
    Location:
    Coquille, Oregon
    the common sense problem with both this and the 'big bang' theory is that something had to exist before the 'collapse' or the 'bang' or there couldn't be a collapse or bang... and if there was a star and a black hole [or material that could cause a 'big bang'] already in existence, wouldn't that = some form of a 'universe'?... and how did that get started?

    the fact is humans simply are not able to comprehend the concept of 'infinity' since everything in human existence has a beginning and an end... so they keep trying to make up scenarios to explain something they aren't capable of understanding... which is how ancient myths, the torah, and the bible came to be, along with all of those astrophysicists' illogical theories...
     
    Andrae Smith likes this.
  7. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    @mammamaia: Definitely, it suggests a preexisting universe, and many before that. It doesn't answer the question 'how did the first ever universe come to be' but rather 'how did our universe come to be'.

    I don't think there's any disagreement in the world of physics about the difficulties human brain has in accepting the idea of infinity. Certainly, I don't have the issue with it as such even though it's difficult to comprehend fully, but I don't think it's productive to assume things are infinite and leave it at that. Good science is about forever searching, probing, breaking things down into constituent parts, in order to gain deeper understanding. There might be an infinity at the bottom of it, or there might not. We have barely scratched the surface of the whole truth.

    However, theories like this one are purely based on mathematics which has no emotional attachment to philosophical possibilities :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
    Macaberz, 123456789 and thirdwind like this.
  8. Jack Asher
    Offline

    Jack Asher Wildly experimental Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,571
    Likes Received:
    2,053
    Location:
    Denver
    Lot's of sci-fi writers have postulated this bullshit idea. But anyone who has read A Brief History of Time knows it's just that. Black holes contain a pulsar, which exists in our universe. They are not wormholes to another dimension, and if you travel through one you die.

    I'd include a better link, but I can't find Hawking's book online. It's like he wants to make money off it or something.
     
    Simpson17866 likes this.
  9. Dresden260
    Offline

    Dresden260 Corrupt Diplomat

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Sitting by a Fountain, Watching the world go by.

    Well there goes all hope for me to create an Empire on one...

    Serious Question what would happen if one happened to slam into another black hole? Would they merge or start ripping each other to shreds in an endless war?
     
  10. Garball
    Offline

    Garball Sometimes nothing can be a real cool hand. Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,846
    Likes Received:
    1,332
    Location:
    S'port, LA
    However, if we assume that if something always had to come first we fall into an infinite regress as stated by Aristotle. If one object always formed from another, or an action from a previous, or one universe from another, that logic would create an infinite number of universes into the "past"; making today an impossibility because an infinite regress provides no starting time.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
    jazzabel likes this.
  11. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    @Jack Asher: Yeah, but, 'Brief History of Time" was written like 20 years ago. Besides, Hawking's is just a theory, and theories are meant to be challenged, improved upon and even refuted. Even a part of a theory may be correct, and another part incorrect. It is my understanding there's a lot of squabbling in the physics community about just about everything, so I'm sure there are pro and cons teams about this as well ;)

    But since publishing in 'Nature' is every natural scientist's wet dream, I won't be dismissing this article.

    @Dresden260: On one hand they could merge. For two universes of same dimensionality and age as ours, the collision probably wouldn't rip apart anything, because interstellar bodies are too far away for that. Similar to galaxy collisions we are seeing today. On the other hand, if the universes were more compressed, maybe it would tear apart the fabric of space or even cause annihilation. Or maybe they wouldn't interact but be 'conjoined' and sharing a 'membrane' (another concept suggested by some theoretical maths). Imagine multiple universes sharing 'membranes', like multicellular organisms, and becoming sentient, how cool would that be? It would certainly be interesting to find out :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
    Macaberz likes this.
  12. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike Felis amatus Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,098
    Likes Received:
    5,311
    Location:
    California, US
    Yeah, @jazzabel , I agree it is important to realize that we're dealing with a lot of theory here. The history of science is full of examples of people becoming too comfortable with their theories and that tunnel vision leading them down the wrong path. Our knowledge of black holes comes primarily from indirect observation, and we formulate theories to explain and predict, &c.

    Branes are interesting, and if you look at some of Brian Greene's books written for the lay audience, you will find some discussions of them (I think The Elegant Universe gets into that).

    I found the article you linked interesting, particularly in that the model proposed addresses some longstanding issues with the Big Bang that have never had really satisfactory answers. Not that I'm ready to buy into the model proposed, but it is certainly interesting.
     
    jazzabel likes this.
  13. jazzabel
    Offline

    jazzabel Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    4,273
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    Thanks for the book recommendation @Steerpike , I'll look it up :) I'm not going to buy into a first publication of a new theory either, but I find the proposal really elegant and intuitive and that appeals to me.
     
  14. Aled James Taylor
    Offline

    Aled James Taylor Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2013
    Messages:
    784
    Likes Received:
    462
    Location:
    UK
    Everyone seems to be thinking in terms of 'cause and effect'. Apparently, on a quantum level, this principle doesn't apply. So 'something out of nothing' is not necessarily a problem.

    At least we don't believe in a God that's meant to have appeared out of nothing for no reason.
     
  15. Michael O
    Offline

    Michael O Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    295
    Likes Received:
    6
    Mmmmm! Sausage!!!

    Hope its Italian sausage. Some mild, some hot, both with green peppers and onions orbiting. Then I warp in with my hoggie bun and gravity draws them inside. There's no escape for I am the black hole.

    Their kinda like BLT's made with fresh garden tomatoes and thick peppered bacon. I just don't know how many I could eat before exploding because my event horizon always run out of bacon. It's a finite universe. I better go check the freezer.
     
    jazzabel and Pheonix like this.
  16. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    A Big Bang does not require any "before" state. A collapse would. bit not a sudden expansion from a singularity at time t = 0. In fact, the Big Bang also marks the beginning of time as well, so there rally is no "before." It's intuitively difficult, because we are used to thinking that every event has other events preceding it. But intuitive or not, the concept of something preceding the Big Bang is fallacious.
     
    123456789 likes this.
  17. 123456789
    Offline

    123456789 Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    3,092
    @jazzabel are you sure this was actually published in Nature? This looks like its nature news talking about a paper archived on an arxiv site.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2013
  18. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike Felis amatus Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,098
    Likes Received:
    5,311
    Location:
    California, US
    Yes, I think this is important and hard for people to conceptualize. Also, if I'm not mistaken, what we currently know about a Big Bang, or even what we can know, grinds to a complete halt at the Planck Time, which comes just after the Big Bang and beyond which the physical laws of the universe break down and we're left in the dark.
     
  19. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY
    One of the scientific laws is that matter is never destroyed it simply changes from one form to another. Yet they say the one exemption is in a black hole matter is destroyed forever. Maybe the matter is in fact not destroyed, but transported to a different dimension or a different place in the universe. Why would that be so hard to believe?
     
  20. JJ_Maxx
    Offline

    JJ_Maxx Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2012
    Messages:
    3,339
    Likes Received:
    502
    I think J. B. S. Haldane said it best when he said, "The universe is not only queerer than we suppose, it is queerer than we can suppose."
     
  21. Macaberz
    Offline

    Macaberz Pay it forward Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,146
    Likes Received:
    297
    Location:
    Arnhem, The Netherlands
    Ah, the universe. I can't say much valuable about this proposed theory as I entirely lack the required knowledge to even begin to comprehend it to its fullest. I can get the layman explanations of course, but I can't even begin to pretend that I can say anything productive about this theory and whether or not it's true.

    I hope this won't derail the thread, but here is a video that view every now and then to appreciate the size of things. Puts our pathetic squabbles into perspective:

     
  22. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    Who are "they"? The mass of a black hole continues to in crease as it accretes matter. Also, the mass/energy of a black hole can return to the rest of the universe over time, due to the Hawking Effect, quantum tunneling across the event horizon. As the black hole shrinks due to the Hawking Effect, its rate of loss increases and its temperature increases, to the point that it evaporates explosively in a high energy burst of radiation.
     
  23. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike Felis amatus Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,098
    Likes Received:
    5,311
    Location:
    California, US
    The First Law of Thermodynamics also assumes a closed system, so if a black hole did have a gateway to another universe through which things could somehow pass, then that law would no longer apply within the confines of our universe.
     
  24. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY
    There are other scientist who believe Hawking is wrong, which of course it is hard to prove one way or the other because it entirely theoretical.
     
  25. Jack Asher
    Offline

    Jack Asher Wildly experimental Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,571
    Likes Received:
    2,053
    Location:
    Denver
    There really isn't any discussion about this one. I suppose you say that black holes are actually dwarf kingdoms, and pretend there was a scientific controversy. But they aren't and there is not.

    Here's why:
    There is a flaw in theoretical allegory that compare space to a grid or a peice paper or to a sheet of rubber. That is that all of these things can develop holes. This has given rise to the sci-fi trope of a hole in the universe. In most cases this is caused by a huge expenditure of energy, an explosion, or the extreme gravity of a black hole. Invariably the concept is that space has been torn irreparably and must be fixed somehow.

    The reality is that the fundamental nature of the universe is more like thick soup. It can bend and warp, but it never changes it's cohesive structure. When it does break (as with a wormhole) the expenditure is enormous, not to cause the break, but to keep it open. The structure of reality closes up a wormhole almost instantly.

    If a wormhole was a portal to another dimension...somehow...then the mass at the heart of the wormhole, the pulsar, would shift from one universe to another. This would close the "portal" and the black hole would dissapear.

    The model is unsustainable.

    When the article mentioned a brane that was two dimensional, he wasn't talking about a physical thing. The event horizon has an inside and an outside, and is therefor two dimensional.
     

Share This Page