Is Our Universe Alone?

[zep73]

The exact properties of our universal forces, the physical constants of the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, electromagnetism, gravity and light, combined with the accelerating expansion of our universe, strongly suggests that there might be many other universes out there, with different physical constants, and whose gravity is pulling in ours from all directions.
If that is the case, dark energy is no longer required to explain the acceleration, and 'our fine-tuned' universe is not special, but just one among many in a vast void filled with quantum fluctuation.

Some have suggested that the acceleration can be explained with 'our universe going through a wormhole in another, much bigger, universe', but I see a conflict in 'two (or more) universes filling the same space', because they would have different properties (and because it is violating Ockham's Razor by complicating things). I obviously could be wrong.
In my understanding, a universe's tuning does not allow other tuning's within it, and in a wormhole, the gravitational pull would be bipolar, not omnidirectional.

Crazy luck is of course also an option, which then puts dark energy back into the equation, but I am very sceptical towards this 'perfect first and only quantum fluctuation' model.

Finally there is the 'unspeakable' option of a single, unique, perfectly tuned universe, that is made by "someone", but let's not get into that in this thread.

[freetoroam]

Wow slow down on the other universes idea, we are still looking for life in this one, one step at a time.

52 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

Finally there is the 'unspeakable' option of a single, unique, perfectly tuned universe, that is made by "someone", but let's not get into that in this thread.

Oh lets do. 

[StarMountainKid]

What about the great void in the cmbr, another universe bumping into ours?

[zep73]

13 minutes ago, StarMountainKid said:

What about the great void in the cmbr, another universe bumping into ours?

Excellent question! I had totally forgotten that! Will need to brood about that for a while....

[zep73]

@StarMountainKid

By examining CMBR images, I can see that there are many "cold spots". The one you addressed only stands out due to the high surrounding radiation.

The main question must be: Could radiation be affected by "outside universes"?
If yes, then we suddenly have a tool to "see" them! If not, it's useless information in this context.

Edited October 20, 2018 by sci-nerd

[StarMountainKid]

It's hard for me to believe ours is the only universe in existence. Then again, it's hard to believe any universe exists. Evidently, ours does, though what it really is, is up to speculation. 

I'm thinking our universe (and possibly others) are only a useless by-product of something else.

[zep73]

An informational video about this subject:

Duration: 25 minutes

Included in this video is the size of the observable universe: 78 x 78 x pi = 19,113.45 billion squared light years

Note: That number will probably grow a lot, when we get a better telescope!

Edited October 20, 2018 by sci-nerd

[zep73]

I had hoped for some (more) feedback on this, from our excellent in house panel of brainiacs!?

[L.A.T.1961]

On 20/10/2018 at 5:54 PM, sci-nerd said:

 expansion of our universe, strongly suggests that there might be many other universes out there, with different physical constants, and whose gravity is pulling in ours from all directions.
If that is the case, dark energy is no longer required to explain the acceleration, and 'our fine-tuned' universe is not special, but just one among many in a vast void filled with quantum fluctuation.

 

It might be difficult to explain uniform expansion by the attraction of other universes. If they have different physical constants then their effect on us would be different, other universes would pull at varying rates, this could be seen in our universe as a non liner expansion. 

 

[zep73]

15 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

It might be difficult to explain uniform expansion by the attraction of other universes. If they have different physical constants then their effect on us would be different, other universes would pull at varying rates, this could be seen in our universe as a non liner expansion. 

Yes! But do we have enough data to determine if it's uniform or nonlinear? I do not know that, because I'm not an astronomer.

Edited October 21, 2018 by sci-nerd

[zep73]

This 2008 article seems to support my external universes theory:

https://www.universetoday.com/19509/the-universe-is-not-expanding-uniformly/

[StarMountainKid]

I still think universes may not be primary existence. We think this because we're consciously part of it. A universe as ours may be a sort of after-birth of Something Else, some Primary Existence.

At any rate, given the probability of an infinite number of existing universes, aw well as more being created constantly (eternal inflation?), I would speculate our universe is not alone in the greater Cosmos.

[L.A.T.1961]

Initial research has found the fine-structure constant, which measures electromagnetism, varied across the universe.    "It appears to get stronger in one direction and weaker in the other, meaning the universe appears to be dipolar,"

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2011/11/02/3353491.htm

 

Measurements made by the European Space Agency’s Planck satellite, which maps the cosmic microwave background, predicted that the Hubble constant value should now be 42 miles (67 km) per second per megaparsec and could be no higher than 43 miles (69 km) per second per megaparsec. This means that for every 3.3 million light-years farther away a galaxy is from us, it is moving 42 miles (67 km) per second faster. But Riess’s team measured a value of 45 miles (73 km) per second per megaparsec, indicating galaxies are moving at a faster rate than implied by observations of the early universe.

https://earthsky.org/space/measuring-universe-expansion-reveals-mystery

 

The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate—or is it?

https://phys.org/news/2016-10-universe-rateor.html

 

 

[zep73]

The are actually three kinds of hypothetical Multiverse's:

1) The most common, simply named "the multiverse", consists of an unknown amount of universes filling an endless void. Ours is one of them. It is hypothesized that each universe has it's own unique natural laws. Some think that in theory you could travel between them, simply by leaving one, and entering the next. Others think you cannot leave your own space/time (the content from one universe cannot mix with another).

2) The "many worlds" quantum multiverse. It is based on the quantum wave function. This type of multiverse is often used in science fiction. Here the universes are not neighbors, but exist in the same space/time, only separated by frequencies. The difference between them are tiny. Everything that potentially could have and will ever happen, happens in this multiverse.

3) One of them does not necessarily exclude the other. There could (hypothetically) be many quantum multiverses, but that idea is so far out, that nobody really entertains it.

None of them can be proven.

Which one of them do you find most likely?

[StarMountainKid]

From memory,  string theory proposes that universes are attached to branes (membranes) that float around in an infinite bulk. When two branes collide, energy is released creating a new big bang universe. 

Gravity is the only force not restricted to the branes, so that the force of gravity extends throughout the bulk. This is why the gravitational attraction of a nearby brane may be distorting the CMB or having a gravitational effect on galaxy super clusters.

[bmk1245]

There is only one universe. Prove me wrong.

(I'm just trolling, throwing bait, so to speak)

[zep73]

1 hour ago, StarMountainKid said:

string theory proposes

As much as I love string theory, it is currently unfalsifiable - just like the multiverse('s).

1 hour ago, bmk1245 said:

There is only one universe. Prove me wrong.

You are an artificial intelligence inside a computer, thinking you are real. Prove me wrong 

[bmk1245]

3 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

[...]

You are an artificial intelligence inside a computer, thinking you are real. Prove me wrong 

Yet, you haven't proved me wrong, hence I'm not an artificial intelligence inside a computer. Here. Satisfied?

[zep73]

2 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Yet, you haven't proved me wrong, hence I'm not an artificial intelligence inside a computer. Here. Satisfied?

So, you get to name an ultimatum, and no one else does? Hmm... kinda silly. Even in a simple game of dices, each player gets a throw.

[bmk1245]

15 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

So, you get to name an ultimatum, and no one else does? Hmm... kinda silly. Even in a simple game of dices, each player gets a throw.

I always win, no matter how you throw...

[Coil]

The Supreme Lord, in His exhalation, breathes out the universes. It is said there are millions of universes, and each one is covered by layers of the material elements. The Lord next expands Himself again, to enter each universe.

Narayana (Sanskrit: नारायण, IAST: Nārāyaṇa), another name for Vishnu, is the supreme god absolute being in Hinduism and is considered as the supreme deity in Vaishnavism. The Bhagavata Purana and Veda declares Narayana as the Para Brahman (Supreme Lord) who creates unlimited universes and enters each one of them as Lord of the Universe.^[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana

Mahavishnu is said to lie in the causal ocean or the Karanodak. He puts the seed of this material universe in Mahāmāyā by glancing at her. Mahāmāyā remains the ever obedient material energy of the Supreme Lord. All the natural elements including sky, fire, water, air and land are created along with mind, intelligence and false ego.

After this, Mahavishnu enters each of the many universes so created (seeds emerging from the pores of His skin) as Garbhodaksayi Vishnu, who lays down in each and every of these individual material universes (Brahmandas). It can be interpreted that Garbodakshayi Vishnu is the collective soul of all souls in a particular material universe and that Mahavishnu is the collective soul of all souls in all of the material universes.

From Garbhodaksayi Vishnu then emerges Brahmā who is the secondary creator (due to his need to meditate to create planets in the material universe) of the planetary systems within particularly this material universe (Brahmanda).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahavishnu

 

 

[toast]

1 hour ago, Coil said:

The Supreme Lord, in His exhalation, breathes out the universes. It is said there are millions of universes, and each one is covered by layers of the material elements. The Lord next expands Himself again, to enter each universe.

What?

Quote

^^Lysergic acid diethylamide, no doubt.

 

[zep73]

@Coil I prefer

They were of course deluded, but that's what you get from Lysergic Acid Diethylamide

Edited October 30, 2018 by sci-nerd

[Coil]

12 hours ago, toast said:

What?

^^Lysergic acid diethylamide, no doubt.

 

Not a single drug will give you access to spiritual levels, much less the vision of the Creator of the universes, and once the Hindus knew this, they really went to the level of the Creator.
And the LSD drug is just a colorful and blurry painting of our world, but it will not give you the experience of super-intelligent worlds.

This is how the artist who received LSD saw the world:

Spoiler

Tell me at least one person who has taken LSD gained spiritual consciousness or has become a holy person? There is no such, therefore, the vision of the Hindus is the real vision of the Creator.

LSD cannot pass any cosmic experiences outside the universe for that, then it is necessary to get out of the body and fly out of the universe, but LSD has no such possibility otherwise why religion and long meditations if you took the mark and that's it, you have an audience with God .

 

Edited October 31, 2018 by Coil

[toast]

26 minutes ago, Coil said:

... therefore, the vision of the Hindus is the real vision of the Creator.

Unfortunately, the forum rules would not allow me to respond to yr post in a North-German fashion, which would be absolute. But I can tell you that my answer would contain these words: person, ship's rail, water, fishes and throw.