Could a 'bubble of nothing' eat the universe?

[UM-Bot 10,439]

According to physicists, a hole in the fabric of reality could wipe out everything in the universe.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/335274/could-a-bubble-of-nothing-eat-the-universe

[RoofGardener 17,506]

According to Joe Biden, Trump will do that anyway if he gets another 4 years ? 

[Piney 72,626]

A variation of the Big Rip or vacuum decay, but with some seriously flawed physics? 

A tear in spacetime would be a cosmic disaster, which is why "portals" don't exist but it's not likely to happen. 

@sci-nerd  What's your take? You know more than me.  

[RoofGardener 17,506]

Meh... just build a wall around it ? 

[Nnicolette 2,063]

Can we please stick to theories that have scientific basis or employ comprehensible physics? I don't quite follow or believe in the possibility that everything will just turn into nothing because it touched a bubble of nothing.

Unless you have ever had a phone screen that attained the growing black hole which slowly consumed the entire screen while tiny particles could be seen sliding into it, then this is a ridiculous picture. Is it supposed to be the collapse of the higgs boson function? and suddenly with no instructions matter will cease to project its holographic self? I mean is there a mechanism that makes this idea even makes sense as a supposed possibility?

 

Whats more alarming is that the article opens by stating that some of these bubbles are currently being studied. WHAT? It then goes on not to mention the existence again except hypothetically. And then they throw in :

It would be interesting to work out under what conditions an observer could 'ride' on the bubble of nothing and see a universe that is similar to the one we live in"

Wtf is going on in that lab?

Edited March 9, 2020 by Nnicolette

[zep73 8,305]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

A variation of the Big Rip or vacuum decay, but with some seriously flawed physics? 

A tear in spacetime would be a cosmic disaster, which is why "portals" don't exist but it's not likely to happen. 

@sci-nerd  What's your take? You know more than me.  

This is the original article: https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/939g5p/physicists-are-studying-mysterious-bubbles-of-nothing-that-eat-spacetime and it's about vacuum decay.

It doesn't become more emergent, just because some journalist decides to write an article about it. It's speculative doomsday science. I think the universe has proven itself stable by now.

[Piney 72,626]

2 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

This is the original article: https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/939g5p/physicists-are-studying-mysterious-bubbles-of-nothing-that-eat-spacetime and it's about vacuum decay.

It doesn't become more emergent, just because some journalist decides to write an article about it. It's speculative doomsday science. I think the universe has proven itself stable by now.

I don't see vacuum decay in the near future.......or any other for that matter. 

[zep73 8,305]

4 minutes ago, Piney said:

I don't see vacuum decay in the near future.......or any other for that matter. 

Me neither. A big rip is more probable IMO. Since all protons and electrons are equally old, if one day their charge would fade, it would happen to all of them at the same time. But, luckily, scientists believe those charges are eternal. Let's hope they're right.

[Orphalesion 7,658]

9 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

Me neither. A big rip is more probable IMO. Since all protons and electrons are equally old, if one day their charge would fade, it would happen to all of them at the same time. But, luckily, scientists believe those charges are eternal. Let's hope they're right.

I mean if a Rip happens billions/trillions/quadrillions of years in the future it's not our problem anymore...

[Xeno-Fish 109,790]

Good, good, the raw power of my nihilism shall consume the universe. 

[Piney 72,626]

20 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

Me neither. A big rip is more probable IMO. Since all protons and electrons are equally old, if one day their charge would fade, it would happen to all of them at the same time. But, luckily, scientists believe those charges are eternal.

And Photons might be eternal. 

I lean towards a big collapse after the Universe is dead and cold. 

 

[Waspie_Dwarf 16,513]

8 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

Can we please stick to theories that have scientific basis or employ comprehensible physics? I don't quite follow or believe in the possibility that everything will just turn into nothing because it touched a bubble of nothing.

What you can follow or believe in is totally irrelevant. Scientific hypothesis aren't about what you believe or understand. Science is NOT a democracy, not all opinions are equal. Science is a meritocracy, some opinions have the weight of knowledge behind them and some are worthless. In this case the opinion of the theoretical physicists doing this research carries weight, the opinion of a random individual on an internet forum that objects to a scientific hypothesis because it is incomprehensible to them is worthless.

Ultimately even the greatest theoretical scientist's opinions are trumped by evidence. The entire role of theoretical physics is to investigate the boundaries of what is possible so that the experimental physicists can look for evidence. To object to that based on one's own personal belief and inability to comprehend is nothing short of egotism.

Quote

The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.
― Neil deGrasse Tyson

 

[Waspie_Dwarf 16,513]

25 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

Since all protons and electrons are equally old,

Who says all protons and electrons are equally old?

Protons and electrons can transform into neutrons by the process of electron capture. By the same token a neutrons can transform back to proton and an electron via the process of beta decay.

[zep73 8,305]

12 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Who says all protons and electrons are equally old?

Protons and electrons can transform into neutrons by the process of electron capture. By the same token a neutrons can transform back to proton and an electron via the process of beta decay.

True dat. But those are a minority.

[jbondo 274]

Well, there is another theory that we live in a simulation. If this is the case, that which governs us, may merely have not considered about doing such a thing. While I am not in this camp, there are some heavyweights who have theorized as such. Imagine a never ending chain of programmers, one a level above the next, having no idea that while they create a universe, there is another entity who created their own. Somewhere along the line, a plan of destruction may be in the cards. Then it's like a row of dominoes depending on how far up the line this happens.

What the hell am I talking about? I have no idea.

[Damien99 61]

Remember though the article stemmed from an actual paper that claims evidence though.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.01764.pdf#page7

i also do not understand which bubble they found that they are evaluating?

Edited March 9, 2020 by Damien99

[Nnicolette 2,063]

7 hours ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

What you can follow or believe in is totally irrelevant. Scientific hypothesis aren't about what you believe or understand. Science is NOT a democracy, not all opinions are equal. Science is a meritocracy, some opinions have the weight of knowledge behind them and some are worthless. In this case the opinion of the theoretical physicists doing this research carries weight, the opinion of a random individual on an internet forum that objects to a scientific hypothesis because it is incomprehensible to them is worthless.

Ultimately even the greatest theoretical scientist's opinions are trumped by evidence. The entire role of theoretical physics is to investigate the boundaries of what is possible so that the experimental physicists can look for evidence. To object to that based on one's own personal belief and inability to comprehend is nothing short of egotism.

 

Once again your inability to give my opinion proper regard because it isnt of merit to your untrained eye outweighed your ability to focus on the content of what i said.

Also your short attention span and continual focus on how to belittle me today has once again made you miss sight of the fact that you offered and seem to comprehend no explanation whatsoever of what i inquired upon. Yet you seem to grasp egotism.  hilarious as usual. Get some sun it may lighten up your mood, and the unbearable burdon it must be carrying the secret knowledge alone of what "bubble of nothing" that will decidedly devour the universe these men of decidedly superior intellect claim to have been studying.  Good luck with that superiority complex... You must be very valued at the library that your vast knowledge has enabled you employment with.

[Xeno-Fish 109,790]

1 minute ago, Nnicolette said:

Once again your inability to give my opinion proper regard because it isnt of merit to your untrained eye outweighed your ability to focus on the content of what i said.

Also your short attention span and continual focus on how to belittle me today has once again made you miss sight of the fact that you offered and seem to comprehend no explanation whatsoever of what i inquired upon. Yet you seem to grasp egotism.  hilarious as usual. Get some sun it may lighten up your mood, and the unbearable burdon it must be carrying the secret knowledge alone of what "bubble of nothing" that will decidedly devour the universe these men of decidedly superior intellect claim to have been studying.  Good luck with that superiority complex... You must be very valued at the library that your vast knowledge has enabled you employment with.

You think too highly of yourself. 

[Nnicolette 2,063]

2 hours ago, Damien99 said:

Remember though the article stemmed from an actual paper that claims evidence though.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.01764.pdf#page7

i also do not understand which bubble they found that they are evaluating?

Watch out i just said that and apparently it means i have ego issues because being a conceited jerk and completely dodging the question is how you prove scientific merit online.

[Damien99 61]

I think my bigger question is where is this bubble they see and are basing there hypothesis on. How many light years away?

according to the paper this is happening I feel 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Damien99

[simplybill 5,231]

They need to create a bubble of nothing in a secure lab, and test it against a bubble of something. A bubble battle would answer their questions.

[SpaceBumZaphod 73]

Time to get to the truth of the matter. Now, where's my electronic thumb and my reservation to Milliways. 

[Damien99 61]

So to boil down the paper, And comments here they found a bubble of nothing that they have been studying which is possibly causing vacuum decay. 
 

how far is this bubble from us?

[jpeniel333 8]

It's amazing to me, how incredibly stupid scientists can be sometimes.

[Waspie_Dwarf 16,513]

33 minutes ago, Damien99 said:

So to boil down the paper, And comments here they found a bubble of nothing that they have been studying which is possibly causing vacuum decay. 
 

how far is this bubble from us?

No they haven't found a bubble of nothing. They are hypothesising what would happen if such a bubble were to spontaneously occur.

From the article:

Quote

The idea concerns a 'bubble of nothing' that could spontaneously form 

Quote

"[A bubble of nothing] describes a possible channel for 'universe destruction;' "

Quote

the fact that the universe is still here after more than 13 billion years of existence suggests that such a fate is not very likely and may never happen at all.

The bubble is at no distance from Earth because , as the article makes clear multiple times,  it doesn't actually exist.