Universes outside the universe

[barbie.=^.^=]

So des the univers bud into other universes. or are they just there, and have they been thre since the begging? its so had to comprehend please give me some ideas.

[Klaynos]

There is just the one universe it comprises everything.

 

Or at least there is currently no evidence for other universes and given that the definition of universe is "everything" then if we could interact with others they would infact be part of this universe.

 

Some string theories have the idea of of a kind of young universe where there are many of them that interact, I'm not well versed on this so can't really say much more than that.

[barbie.=^.^=]

That makes sense. its so hard to comprehend though :/..... i hope were not the only universe. whoe knows what else is out there?

[thedarkshade]

whoe knows what else is out there?

I once heard a philosopher (don't remember who) saying that universe is nothing bur matter and curved space.

[barbie.=^.^=]

lol so is my mom's bum, but do you think it curves outward or inward does that make sense? I personally think there might be other universes and the rate were going at with gravity what if we collide?

[Country Boy]

Perhaps it would help if you defined exactly what YOU mean by "universe". In its general sense, it is defined as encompassing everything and so there cannot, by definition, be more than one universe.

 

And what do you mean by "budding"?

[thedarkshade]

HallsofIvy's got a point. You can't have more than one everything, but everythingness surely includes a lot of things of whose nature we might not be aware at all. Universe is just way too big!

 

do you think it curves outward or inward

Huh? That would really depend from where do you 'look' it from.

 

And by budding I think she means the 'contact' of mini-universes with one another to form THE UNIVERSE.

[Taq_is_hot]

It is true that the definition of "universe" is "everything". So, with that said, you technically cannot have more than one universe. However, if you are talking about groups or clusters of objects, then you can certainly have more than one. Think about it, we have solar systems which are part of a galaxy, then we have many galaxies and so on. So, what if there is an enormous space between several or even many of what we call the "universe" that we will forever be unable to see. In other words, there could be groups of clusters of galaxies and those groups could be in a cluster and those clusters in a group and those groups in a cluster....can you spell infinity? I have a tendancy to believe that this must be how it is...unless there really is an end to it. If everything came from the big bang, what if there were several or many big bangs in places far beyond our knowing. What we know could very well just be a tiny insignificant portion of what's really out there.

[barbie.=^.^=]

By budding i mean, it produces from itself like asexual microrganisms in biology.

[ajb]

You mean like "pinching off", making holes or handles that break-off.

 

Well, this is outside general relativity which does not allow such topological changes, but quantum gravity probably does. (Without a solid theory of quantum gravity we cant say exactly).

 

So I would say it is a possibility that topological change plays a role in quantum gravity and the idea of "budding" may be feasible.

[Zephir]

..There is just the one universe it comprises everything....

The Universe is universal by definition. But here are black hole models of individual Universe generations.

[woarber]

Well, it's true there can be only one universe, but we mustn't forget about the unspace outside the universe. While our universe is constantly expanding past the unspace there will always be nothing.

[D H]

One thing is certain: This thread does not belong in the Classical Physics forum. I am moving it to the Astronomy and Cosmology forum where it has a better chance of catching the attention of one of our resident cosmology experts.

 

The multiple universes ("multiverse") hypothesis represents a non-mainstream (but definitely not crackpot) branch of cosmology. One of the key proponents of this hypothesis is David Deutsch, a professor of physics at Oxford. The hypothesis is closely aligned with the multiple-worlds hypothesis of quantum physics. Follow this link for a lay article by David Deutcsh on the multiverse, original published in Frontiers magazine in December 1998. You can also google the terms "multiverse" and "many worlds". Beware that while the multiverse and many-worlds hypotheses fall in the realm of accepted but non-mainstream physics/cosmology, many of the hits in those google searches do fall into the "certified 100% pure psychoceramics" category.

[DJBruce]

As already said by definition there is only one universe. But there are some people who believe that there are multiple universe a multi-verse to say. Some believe that there are parallel universe where things are reversed from this things in this universe.

 

There's this double slit experiment which proves the existence of other universes I believe.

 

Physicists now know that light also consists of particles called photons. If photons travel through the slits one at a time, they gradually reproduce the same pattern of stripes on the film. That could happen only if one photon passes through both slits simultaneously, or, as David Deutsch argues, if the photon we see interacts with an invisible photon, from another universe, passing through the slit.

[Klaynos]

As already said by definition there is only one universe. But there are some people who believe that there are multiple universe a multi-verse to say. Some believe that there are parallel universe where things are reversed from this things in this universe.

 

There's this double slit experiment which proves the existence of other universes I believe.

 

That's one interpretation of it, without a sound mathematical falsifiable test atm, so it's not evidence atm.

[Arch2008]

Neil Turok claims that the cosmological constant is artificially low and that this can be explained by a “cyclic” universe, that grows from a Big Bang and then collapses into a Big Crunch only to Big Bang again.

http://wwwphy.princeton.edu/~steinh/lambda16.pdf

 

Thus, our own universe may have existed in multiple iterations. Also, colliding energy branes in hyperspace may have caused the BB and this process may have created other universes.

http://universe-review.ca/F15-particle.htm#manifold

 

Scientists hope to use the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) data to determine what may have happened prior to the BB. This may settle the matter. However, no hard evidence has been found…yet.

[Miri]

Was not the generally accepted interpretation of the double slit experiment the one of probability waves? But I digress, that's quantum.

 

I agree with those who state that the universe of itself is universal. There isn't any "unspace" to refer to. I think many people are caught up with the false image that the "big bang" or "expansion" of the universe appears as a dot of matter floating in a sea of darkness, and all of a sudden the matter exploded outwards, flinging itself into the depths of the darkness. Rather, if one were to be present in the pinprick of matter, one would probably not realize the confinements of his space. There is no "outside" - the dense point that he occupies still appears infinite to him as an insider - it's just that galaxies appearing far away to us now might appear to be closer, but no matter what, he will not be able to perceive a boundary of his space.

 

Basically, there is no "outside" to speak of, as "outside" suggests another space, and space is confined to the "inside".

[NicholasConners]

it is possible that this is the one and only. It could expand and contract, expanding again and continuing this cycle.

 

Ofcourse there could be another universe, or ours could be like this, that expands to a point where every particle within it rips apart and the universe because an unstable soup of infinity with no laws of physics. In this case it is possible for another universe to be pinched off from the ripping one as a result of the unstable mixing particles matter and unbalanced laws.

 

So it could be that our Universe was formed from another one, and could hold the possibility to create a second one. Signs show our universe may possibly be a "Big Rip" universe, but it is too early to tell exactly.

[Joonasle]

So des the univers bud into other universes. or are they just there, and have they been thre since the begging? its so had to comprehend please give me some ideas.

 

As a well known FACT we are living in this specific universe, and aren't able to have any kind of information about the other universes if they even exist.

 

Neither can we have any information about just the moment of 'Big Bang' we just know the basic fact that something happened but nor can we have any information from outside of the universe we are living in.

 

As a physicist I must admit it is sad because this is a huge hole in our knowledgement.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Joonasle

[Arch2008]

"A controversial claim by Laura Mersini-Houghton is that it [the WMAP cold spot] could be the imprint of another universe beyond our own, caused by quantum entanglement between universes before they were separated by cosmic inflation.[14] Laura Mersini-Houghton said, "Standard cosmology cannot explain such a giant cosmic hole" and made the remarkable hypothesis that the WMAP cold spot is "… the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own." If true this provides the first empirical evidence for a parallel universe (though theoretical models of parallel universes existed previously). It would also support String theory. The team claims there are testable consequences for its theory. If the parallel universe theory is true there will be a similar void in the Northern hemisphere of the Celestial sphere.[1]"

 

The WMAP may provide other evidence of a multiverse. So we may be able to get information about its existence.