Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Alternative multiverse theories?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 1
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?Page 1 of 2    (1, 2)
This is my first visit to this forum so I'll apologise in advance for any deficit in specific scientific terms, below average (for this board) education etc etc

All I am looking for is this

Rather than having to try and explain my own view on what I think is the format/make-up of "space" meaning the overal volume that all of everything exists in I was hoping to find an existing theory so I could just say "my view is like, the same as or is similar to XYZs theory

The problem I have found is that all the references I have found that seemed they might be along the right lines so far dealing with multiverses arent even similar as they seem to center around concepts such as parallel universes, divergent universes and those sort of concepts

Where as my own view/belief whatever you'd call is would be more along the lines of likening our universe to one oak tree in an endless forest of oak trees. Where each is unique but also might have some similarity too but arent occupying the same space time, volume of space and that would form and die at vastly varying times but are still by definition all "oak trees" but with some degree of potential ability to interact on some levels if close enough, or not if further away

Not sure how clear that analogy might be, but any nudges towards an existing theory that might fit the bill would be appreciated

Cheers
 2findU
Joined: 11/19/2005
Msg: 2
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/14/2011 3:07:42 PM
I have this theory, although I like science I am not a scientist, astronomer or astrophysicist. But my theory about multiverses relates to "dark matter". I was hypothesizing that maybe the mass that dark matter consists of are parallel universes existing in the same time and space as out Universe.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 3
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/14/2011 3:38:07 PM
Thing is though it could equally be argued that ours is the "darkmatter" universe, from the "other one" as people living in what we viewed as dark matter would see it like its ordinary matter, but wouldnt be able to view our universe or our matter so to them it would be "dark"

But that is just the bipolar version of the concentric multiverse type theories that postulate many parallel universes exist in the same place at the same time without knowing of each others existence

Thats not really the type of theory I'm looking for, it would more along the lines of multiple universes throughout the infinity of space similar to how we view galaxies within our own universe

Each different but similar only in their cycles and definition IE the multiple oak trees in a forest analogy rather than two oak trees in the same place at the same time with one being an oak tree and the other being an invisible undetectable "dark oak" if that makes sense?

So whatever does or doesnt apply to dark matter would also apply in the countless infinate billions of other universes too whether thats being an alternate version of each one or just another type of matter that is also a constituent part of each one

I'm not a fan of centric theories whether religious or astrological. And in the same way I never thought the earth was the centre of the universe I also dont believe our universe is the solitary collection of matter in space, but one of an endless amount of universes covering an infinite volume of space
 lotus_74
Joined: 9/26/2011
Msg: 4
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/23/2011 10:15:03 PM
well i have a spin off of that.. i believe that black holes may be portals to parallel (sp) universes and this is why..scientists found trillions of gallons of water chillin outside a blackhole at the center of our galaxy.Now..no man, ape or land rover has ever been close enough to one to tell me that its just a collapsed star that disintegrates light...if it doesnt disintregrate water. Whos to say the light isnt just "escaping"on another "side"??..here is another "thought" of mine. Dreams. We see things that happened long ago, things that havnt happened or just us but unfamiliar surroundings.. whos to say when we dream we dont either go forward or backward in time, and those dreams that are us yet unfamiliar surroundings, arnt us ina different dimension, concurrent with the one we are aware of?? dejavu, folks who can see things before they happen..how is all this possible, because there is multiple "you's" on multiple dimensions..it all fits together eventually
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 5
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/23/2011 11:01:50 PM
multiverse, metaphysical, same difference.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 6
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/24/2011 7:51:23 AM

multiverse, metaphysical, same difference.


No, it really isn't.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphysics


METAPHYSICS

(1) : a division of philosophy that is concerned with the fundamental nature of reality and being and that includes ontology, cosmology, and often epistemology

(2) : ontology 2
b : abstract philosophical studies : a study of what is outside objective experience



mul·ti·verse noun \ˈməl-tē-ˌvərs\

cosmology
: a theoretical reality that includes a possibly infinite number of parallel universes
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 7
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/24/2011 4:21:07 PM

mul·ti·verse noun \ˈməl-tē-ˌvərs\

cosmology
: a theoretical reality that includes a possibly infinite number of parallel universes



OOOH, this is "interesting" in that its the total opposite of what I was looking for lol

So if thats the only meaning of "mutliverse" I actually mean something else, not sure what though lol

rather than parallel universes, just lots OF universes each in its own area of space but completely seperate entities and not "parallel" or related in anyway along those sort of lines


Imagince if the galaxies in our universe were like a scaled down representation, with each actually being a wholly seperate universe in its own right scattered about througout an infinite vastness of space

So if "multiverses" isnt the correct term what would be?
 kissmesilly
Joined: 8/27/2006
Msg: 8
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/25/2011 2:13:50 PM
The term "multiverse" is just as the dictionary explains it. The "Universe" is a term that science uses to encompass everything that is, has been, or ever will be.
From my point of view, if there are additional Universes, they, just as ours, are most likely sealed environments, or at least separated by a void that no form of energy can pass through. On earth, sound needs some sort of mater to pass through; in space, even light would need something to pass through or it will not travel. I am sure there are more universes, but it is doubtful that there will ever be a way of detecting them. Think of our universe as a single atom in the cherry your GF just ate, and regardless of what science tells us right now, what we understand as an atom may in fact be a universe with trillions of stars and planets and some form of life that right now is asking if there is anything outside of there universe as they understand it.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 9
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/25/2011 2:22:47 PM
I have to admit I have always thought the postulation that our entire universe could simply be a collection of subatomic particles in a molecule in a boil on the bottom of some other species which is in turn living in a universe that is the same to another species etc etc is pretty cute

Perfect stuff for discussing when stoned lol

And yeah, to have a clear distinction between two universes there would need to be a void between them, but that wouldnt necessarily need to be more of a vaccum than space as we are aware of it, or could be a perfcct vaccum

But by the same token, if the idea that a universe is all the matter origionating from "a" big bang, then it could also be just as possible that some even overlap and matter, galaxies etc from one expanding universe spread into the matter from other similarly expanding universes too or some universal law could mean theyre all so far apart overlaps could never occur

But yeah, thsts the kind of thing I was looking for, an existing theory along those type of lines (Rather than the boil on the bum type overlap lol)
 cbbull21
Joined: 3/9/2009
Msg: 10
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/25/2011 6:09:16 PM
I gather that you want to believe that since the universe is infinite, infinitely many "Hubble Universes"(ours would have a radius of about 14.7B light years now) exist but they're so far away from each other that the one in question, ours, is all you would ever know exists. No light from our universe would ever be seen in another and therefore nothing about our "Hubble Universe" will ever be known by another HU. A moot point.
If there were more than one big bang in our universe, each far from the other, would the laws of physics be different for each and if so what happens when they interact/coalesce?
No, there cannot be a universe within an atom.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 11
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/26/2011 8:10:53 AM
Well rather than "wanting" to believe it, Its what I reckon is far more likely to be the case than just one universe in all of existence as that is a very homocentric type of assumption really not that far removed from when people thought there was no land other than their land and that taking to ships would mean you'd fall off the edge of the world, or that the universe revolved around the earth or that the earth itself was infact flat

So yeah, I was trying to find out if there was already a theory like that floating around somewhere in the erm..... universe I guess lol

As for the distance thing though, would there even be a reason they couldnt expand to the point of overlapping in some places and also have huge voids between them in others?

If space itself was indeed infinite and there was an infinite amount of hubble universes in it then surely it theyre likely to be of various sizes, spacings and densities

As for laws of physics, if the tiny fraction of laws we are aware of are infact "laws" by the true meaning of the word in that context then they'd have to obey by them, otherwise they wouldnt be laws

But by the same token, some could be influenced more by laws of physics we are nowhere near even imagining let alonge comprehending and testing for yet. So they wouldnt necessarily have to be identical in format either

But that aside, yeah. I guess what I was trying to find out is whether there is already a theory that theres multiple or even an infinite number of "hubble universes" in existence in space as a whole and what (if there is) its called
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 12
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/26/2011 9:10:15 AM

But that aside, yeah. I guess what I was trying to find out is whether there is already a theory that theres multiple or even an infinite number of "hubble universes" in existence in space as a whole and what (if there is) its called


There's several. None of which are presently supported by any unequivocal observational evidence but with mathematical support.

Collectively, they're known as "multiverse" theory. There are several flavours of this same theory depending on who's doing the math.

As to the size of our universe, it's believed that it is actually a whole lot larger than 28 billion light years across taking into account from time=0 to present. Don't forget, the universe went through a period of superluminal expansion (inflation) which would mean that a significant portion of the actual physical universe is considerably larger....like over 100 billion light years.

Or it may actually be infinite. It depends on who you talk to.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 13
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/26/2011 9:42:16 AM
Cheers, I had already searched for multiverse theories before posting the thread

But all the ones I found seemed to be suggesting multiple universes in the same place but resonating at different frequencies or the parallel universe type theories

I did try to describe what exactly I was trying to find with the forest of oak trees analogy early on

But as I didnt manage to find one before I wondered if there might be a different term rather than multiverse that I needed to google
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 14
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/26/2011 12:19:17 PM
But all the ones I found seemed to be suggesting multiple universes in the same place but resonating at different frequencies or the parallel universe type theories


There's also cyclic theories in which universes contract and rebound, there's universes "budding off" existing universes, the theory that black holes in this universe are the big bangs for new universes, or that this spacetime is host to multiple big bangs....

Again...many different theories.


But as I didnt manage to find one before I wondered if there might be a different term rather than multiverse that I needed to google


Not really, at least, none that I'm aware of. I stand to be corrected, of course.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/26/2011 12:25:41 PM

There's also cyclic theories in which universes contract and rebound


Would that be like cyclic endothermic entropy? If so I kind of viewed that as one "universe" going repeatedly through a cycle rather than one vanishing from existence and another one popping up in the same place

Cheers though, I'll see if I can find one thats along the lines of what I want

Tbh, its only out of laziness. It would be easier to say "I favour the "whatever" theory" rather than having to try and explain it lol

No point reinventing the wheel :)
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 16
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/27/2011 8:44:32 PM
keep in mind the only reason for the multiverse idea in the first place is to make some sense of this cool one in a million one poping up.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 17
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/28/2011 4:44:51 AM

keep in mind the only reason for the multiverse idea in the first place is to make some sense of this cool one in a million one poping up.


As opposed to....what? Invisible magic sky wizard?
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 18
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/28/2011 10:38:59 PM
I think the current prefered hypothesis is that the multiverse consists of an unknowable number of adjacent universes. My understanding of the concept is that these would likely be identical or largely similar in laws of physics, due to the nature of their formation, and they would in essence be continuous with one another. You could hypothetically simply travel from point A to point B and be in a different universe. What makes this practically impossible and defines them as separate universes is expansion: the boundary between adjacent and expanding universes is so large and distant that you could not physically reach it before it had expanded beyond your reach. That's also why they do not physically interact...now. A recent theory, with some evidenciary support, holds that a very young universe which had not yet expanded “much” would still be influenced by the gravity of adjacent universes. That gravitational influence would be the cause of the otherwise unexplained clumping and resulting superstructure of our universe.

It is my understanding that any “voids” would be part of a universe. It is not possible for universes to overlap, nor for voids to exist “between” them. There is no between, as space only exists as a consequence of a universe coming into being. They can't overlap because of how the boundaries are defined and because they don't expand 'towards' one another - they just expand. They create their own space.

Given the increasing powers of computers and computer modeling, I would not be surprised if we start seeing models of the structure of adjacent universes. The accuracy will be essentially unconfirmable, but the structure of our own universe could be used to provide the data showing where and how much gravitational influence affected our universe up until the time of gravitational disconnect. That would basically be a proxy for how matter was distributed in adjacent universes over a brief period of time. It would probably be stretching the limits to model the growth of those universes, given the relatively brief period of time available.

All of this does not preclude additional overlapping universes - “parallel” in the usual use of the word. I note that the dictionary definition offered above does not require that “parallel” universes occupy the same physical space. It only requires that they be...'parallel', which can mean adjacent or adjoining.

There are a number of different theories, and they have probably all been addressed at one or more times in popular magazines like Scientific American, Discover, and Popular Science.

Regarding “dark matter” - this is not normally considered some mysterious substance. It's matter because it has a gravitational influence. It's dark because we can't see it. Much of what is called dark matter is hypothesized to be hydrogen. There can be a lot of it diffused across space such that you can't see it or measure it, but when it's part of the 'empty' space of a galaxy or galaxy cluster, the combined mass can make that region much 'heavier' than we would estimate based on the larger visible objects. When it's dispersed between stars, the gravitational effects may be balanced relative to the stars and thus be undetectable at that scale, but the galaxy as a whole is much heavier, and that CAN be measured.


scientists found trillions of gallons of water chillin outside a blackhole at the center of our galaxy.Now..no man, ape or land rover has ever been close enough to one to tell me that its just a collapsed star that disintegrates light...if it doesnt disintregrate water. Whos to say the light isnt just "escaping"on another "side"??

Operative word being “outside”. Matter is only 'destroyed' by a black hole when it enters the black hole. As it is pulled in, there is a large amount of energy released by the tearing apart of larger particles. Large amounts of this energy are pulled into the spinning magnetic field and exit as polar jets. I think this is possible because these photons never actually cross the event horizon; they are released as matter is torn apart at or near the horizon.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 19
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/29/2011 7:02:16 PM
Thanks for that FrogO

Multiple adjacent universes, thats the kind of thing :)

Kind of obvious and embarassing I didnt think of googling that specific term, one of the down sides of normally being online and in a "googlin" mood near bedtime (best excuse I could think of haha)

The definition of "space" has been one of my stumbling blocks when trying to explain what I think/believe due to many holding the believe than an expanding universe "creates" space as it expands. Which I have to admit I struggle with as a concept

Unless that useage of the word has a specific definition that makes space (volume) non existent until an expanding universe injects matter into it I would tend to think that the universe expands "into" space (empty volume) as it expands

Maybe pure universe free volume is dark matter and an expanding universe is akin to a virus growing and polluting it with matter (non dark) or maybe its just an absolute vaccum, but either way I find (obviously with no scientific reason behind it) it more believable an expanding universe is in space more like an exploding sun in a galaxy. Something shootings its matter off into some format of void that was already there

If space is defined as volume with matter of "a" or "the" universe in it, then I can get the idea a universe creates it as it expands. But the idea that if you reached the end of our universe there would be what? A wall because no "space" beyond that point has been created yet? Just feels like a remnant from the "Universe revolves around the earth" type mentality, very mankind centric in nature, but as each idea that we are some pivotal aspect of creation vanishes its dropped to a lesser model until now it just rests at being "we're so speshul that the universe we exist in is all that exists in all of time and space" kind of thing if that makes sense

Although if a universe displaced dark matter or injected matter into a near void, and there were indeed many adjacent universes then I guess between them you could have billions of light years worth of dark matter compressed into ever increasing densities but even that would require the initial start of a universe to have created some form of "bubble" or membrane from the initial big bang or whatever that remains intact unless matter and dark matter naturally repelled each other and the displacement was caused by something similar to a magnetic effect when two identical poles meet each other or similar to how oil and water interact I guess
 cbbull21
Joined: 3/9/2009
Msg: 20
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/29/2011 9:12:26 PM
How did our universe begin? If your answer is something like branes, and a result of something that happened involving n-universes within a multiverse, then there's something odd about your reasoning. Now we must ask : How did all of those/multiverse as a whole begin? Apparently the answer to a question always leads to a more complex question, ad infinitum. Therefore the simplest explanation is infinitely complex.??? I thought we worked down to fundamental reason/science and up from there?
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 21
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/29/2011 9:34:03 PM

How did our universe begin?


In short...we don't know.


Therefore the simplest explanation is infinitely complex.??? I thought we worked down to fundamental reason/science and up from there?


Science works from evidence and observation. Mathematically-derived models can point researchers in the direction, but it will ultimately boil down to what comes off a telescope.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 22
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/30/2011 6:39:50 AM
CBBull

Actually science doesnt always work that way, infact some of the major leaps in science have been due to a theory and nothing else being sparked by some quite unsceintific observations and then people have set out to see if the theory is infact possible, and then proveable

Even in quantum theory as an example, many accepted theories are based on the observation of an "unknown" or "unexplainable" occurence, so a purely hypothetical and therefore with todays equipment often unproveable theorum is arrived at, some of which could be true, most of which (as they often conflict with each other) wont be

For me the idea that "nothing" existed before our universe is the "complex" assumption, and equally raises endless questions

I also find it odd to assume that our universe would be the absolute only one in existence, and as I said I suspect is bourne out of mankinds own arrogance and seemingly inate desire to feel "special" in some way

The fact we wouldnt be able to see any other universe doesnt negate their existence, infact we cant see most of the light radiated from our own universe either, just a snapshot of it from so far in the past that what we are actually observing might not even exist anymore and where there could be entire galaxies in areas of dark space that havent been there long enough for their light to have reached us yet

So even what we "think" we know about this one soltary universe is based on a very short (Relatively speaking) window of observation and information that is billions of years out of date anyway in some cases

We have no "scientific" idea other than hypothesis to know what many aspects of the universe was like or will be like just thousands of years from now, never mind hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of years either way
 Osirus33
Joined: 10/13/2011
Msg: 23
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/30/2011 8:53:16 AM
Some of us knw how the universe began..... THOUGHT! BUT NOT JUST ANY THOUGHT... THE CREATOR IS INTELLIGENT!! Thought is a multidimensional phenomenon that crystalizes eventually.... The physical universe itself is a crystalized form of thought..... Although the Big Bang model is absolutely ludacris for the most part, it does contain an element of truth, and that is that light existed before time and space... THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS! As the saying goes " The best place to hide the truth is between two lies" If light existed before the lower space time continuum was created... WHERE THE HELL DID IT EXIST? Obviously in much higher dimensions! In much The same fashion that an invention exists in the higher dimensions of mind before being manifest into physical reality....NUFF SAID!
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 24
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/30/2011 10:45:40 PM

Some of us knw how the universe began..... THOUGHT! BUT NOT JUST ANY THOUGHT... THE CREATOR IS INTELLIGENT!! Thought is a multidimensional phenomenon that crystalizes eventually.... The physical universe itself is a crystalized form of thought..... Although the Big Bang model is absolutely ludacris for the most part, it does contain an element of truth, and that is that light existed before time and space... THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS! As the saying goes " The best place to hide the truth is between two lies" If light existed before the lower space time continuum was created... WHERE THE HELL DID IT EXIST? Obviously in much higher dimensions! In much The same fashion that an invention exists in the higher dimensions of mind before being manifest into physical reality....NUFF SAID!

Word salad.

When the subject matter exceeds your ability to spell, it's doubtful you have a useful understanding of the former. It's painfully obvious that's the case.


Even in quantum theory as an example, many accepted theories are based on the observation of an "unknown" or "unexplainable" occurence, so a purely hypothetical and therefore with todays equipment often unproveable theorum is arrived at, some of which could be true, most of which (as they often conflict with each other) wont be

If you look more closely, you will find this summary to be inaccurate. New theories and hypotheses, in order to be even considered, have to fit BOTH past observations AND new ones. They are refinements of previous theories because they have to not only explain all the things that were successfully explained before, but also those which were not.

That's how science works. Sometimes a hypothesis fails. Sobeit. That's a necessity, as it produces answers regardless of whether it works or doesn't, and every hypothesis is offered as a pair. If one is false, the other must be true. It's also quite possible that a new hypothesis will succeed in its primary role, but lead to a new wrinkle that contravenes past explanations. Again, that's how science works: offer possible explanations, and then gradually narrow the possibilities by experimenting to prove which explanations are impossible.


Now we must ask : How did all of those/multiverse as a whole begin? Apparently the answer to a question always leads to a more complex question, ad infinitum. Therefore the simplest explanation is infinitely complex.??? I thought we worked down to fundamental reason/science and up from there?

The issue here is that our explanations and understandings are necessarily constrained by the nature of our own existence. Those constraints need not apply to the universe or multiverse. If you take the time and energy to examine each available explanation for the scope and origin of the multiverse, you will find something important: they ALL exceed our perceptions and our ability to grasp. That being the case, we can't rule out any explanation on that basis alone. We can't conceive of a non-time or non-space any better than we can infinite time or infinite space. We want absolute beginnings but demand that something precede those beginnings. Can't have it both ways, so the assumptions must be considered faulty.


Maybe pure universe free volume is dark matter and an expanding universe is akin to a virus growing and polluting it with matter (non dark) or maybe its just an absolute vaccum, but either way I find (obviously with no scientific reason behind it) it more believable an expanding universe is in space more like an exploding sun in a galaxy. Something shootings its matter off into some format of void that was already there

Let me re-iterate: you're not understanding "dark matter" correctly. Dark matter is the burglar in the basement - he's exactly the same matter as you find throughout the house, you just can't see him. You see his influence and thus know he exists, you just don't see him. What we have is what we can see - galaxies and galaxy clusters, whose mass we can measure. We can measure the mass from what we see and calculate, the celestial bodies themselves. We can also measure based upon the gravitational influences on other bodies. Trouble is, the gravitational mass is greater than the observed mass, which implies that there's a lot of UNobserved mass, ie "dark matter". This is not outside the universe, but largely in or adjacent to galaxies within the universe because it is THOSE bodies which are more massive than they appear. And that's why "dark matter" is generally thought to be dust and hydrogen. Can't see it directly, but it could account for a LOT of weight.


But the idea that if you reached the end of our universe there would be what? A wall because no "space" beyond that point has been created yet?

Doesn't matter. You can't actually reach the edge of the universe, even to cross to an adjacent one. Expansion makes it impossible to get there, even for light. Where there is no adjacent universe, there is no space. No need for a wall, as there is simply nothing in existence there. In any case, light and expansion could reach these places long before you ever could, making it moot.


Just feels like a remnant from the "Universe revolves around the earth" type mentality, very mankind centric in nature, but as each idea that we are some pivotal aspect of creation vanishes its dropped to a lesser model until now it just rests at being "we're so speshul that the universe we exist in is all that exists in all of time and space" kind of thing if that makes sense

See above, regarding constraints on understanding.


Although if a universe displaced dark matter or injected matter into a near void, and there were indeed many adjacent universes then I guess between them you could have billions of light years worth of dark matter compressed into ever increasing densities but even that would require the initial start of a universe to have created some form of "bubble" or membrane from the initial big bang or whatever that remains intact unless matter and dark matter naturally repelled each other and the displacement was caused by something similar to a magnetic effect when two identical poles meet each other or similar to how oil and water interact I guess

See above, regarding the ACTUAL nature of dark matter.

As for the non-space outside of universes, you can't think of it as a void or anything "filled". It's just -not- space. I think it might be more accurate to think in terms of dimensions: what we perceive of as space is made up of four dimensions measurable in meters [or feet, seconds, etc]; X, Y, Z, and time. However, a full understanding of physics typically requires many more dimensions than these, and it is only those four which we perceive directly. Outside of the multiverse, those four do not overlap or interact the same way, but they potentially can. Another way to look at it is like a tesseract, hypercube, or "Tardis", objects which are larger on the inside than on the outside - they have more "space" within than they occupy outside. Similarly, the non-space outside of the multiverse isn't limited to the dimensions seen within the multiverse.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 25
view profile
History
Alternative multiverse theories?
Posted: 10/31/2011 7:09:09 PM
I thought what dark matter was or wasnt was still being heavily debated, or am I confusing it with antimatter?

The point I was making though, and I am strugging with knowing what the "accepted term" would be is a "volume" that our iniverse hasnt expanded into "yet"

I know we cant physically travel to the outside edge of our universe, but niether can the countless scientists who have theorised about what is at that outside edge or beyond it. Not being able to actually go there till some form of travel effectively capable of many times light speed doesnt stop it being open for consideration or theorising

What I was saying is that some claim that literally "nothing" exists outside the universe, not an empty void, but quite literally nothing at all, not even a void

And that the absolute only "stuff" (not exactly scientific I know lol) in existence is within the bounds of our universe

Rather than a "volume" being there first that the universe itself is in the process of expanding into which I "believe" to be far more reasonable

I really dont even see why it would need to be complicated by extra dimensions other than to make extra funding more likely tbh

And despite what you said about infinity, I really dont have any problem at all with thinking about something being "infinite", its as reasonable a concept as finite is,

so for me the idea that theres an infinite "volume" within which one or more hubble universes or even an infinite number of hubble universes are expaning into in various places and with various ages is no more impossible to imagine than a forest of trees equally too vast or numerous for me to count

The "volume" between those universes could however be a variety of things I would guess, from an absolute and totally perfect vaccum to a near vaccum with very sporadic hydrogen content or even due to the lack of strong gravitational bodies to attract matter even a fairly (compared to our local space) populated vaccum with a much higher density of atoms but what the "volume" is actually comprised or might be comprised of in itself isnt overly relevant, just the belief that there is a "volume" there first and that a hubble universe expands into it rather than nothing existing except that expanding hubble universe
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Alternative multiverse theories?