CupidS Escorts

The Universe Is Made of Tiny Bubbles Containing Mini-Universes, Scientists Say

Charlemagne

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2017
15,451
2,484
113
The Universe Is Made of Tiny Bubbles Containing Mini-Universes, Scientists Say

'Spacetime foam' might just be the wildest thing in the known universe, and we're just starting to understand it.

By Carly Minsky

Oct 24 2019, 8:00 am

A persistent cosmological puzzle has been troubling physicists since 1917: what is the universe made of?

Complicating this already-mind-boggling question is the fact that our best theories conflict with our observations of the universe. Albert Einstein, according to scientific folklore, felt a unique responsibility for introducing this entire problem, reportedly referring to it as his "biggest blunder."

Essentially, Einstein's novel theory of general relativity didn’t hold up when used to describe the universe as a whole. General relativity described the "geometry" of spacetime as being a trampoline-like surface; planets are heavy bowling balls that distort the surface, creating curves. If a less heavy ball (like a marble) was placed near the bowling ball, it would roll along the surface just like the motion of planets in orbit. Thus, orbits are explained not by a gravitational “force” but by curvature in spacetime.

This proposal worked when considering small regions of spacetime. But when Einstein applied it to the entire universe, its predictions didn't fit. So, Einstein introduced the "cosmological constant," a fixed value that represents a kind of anti-gravity, anti-mass, and anti-energy, counteracting gravity’s effects. But when scientists discovered that the universe was expanding rather than static, as Einstein had believed, the cosmological constant was set to zero and more or less ignored. After we learned that the universe’s expansion is accelerating, however, scientists could no longer conveniently cancel out Einstein’s anti-gravity suggestion.

What was previously assumed to be empty space in the universe now had to be filled with huge amounts of mysterious anti-energy in order to explain observations of the universe’s ever-quickening expansion. Even so, observations of the universe’s expansion suggest that the energy is 60 to 120 orders of magnitude lower than what recent quantum field theory predicts.

What this means is that all of this extra energy is somehow missing when we look at the universe as a whole; either it’s effectively hidden or very different in nature to the energy we do know about.

Today, theoretical physicists are trying to reconcile these mysteries by examining the structure of so-called “spacetime” in the universe at the smallest possible scale, with surprising findings: spacetime might not be the trampoline-like plane scientists once envisioned—it might be a foamy mess of bubbles all containing mini-universes living and dying inside our own.

What is spacetime foam?

To try and solve the mystery of what fills the universe, scientists have been exploring the possibility that it's actually full of bubbles.

In 1955, influential physicist John Wheeler proposed that, at the quantum level, spacetime is not constant but "foamy," made up of ever-changing tiny bubbles. As for what these bubbles are "made" of, recent work suggests that spacetime bubbles are essentially mini-universes briefly forming inside our own.

The spacetime foam proposal fits nicely with the intrinsic uncertainty and indeterminism of the quantum world. Spacetime foam extends quantum uncertainty in particle position and momentum to the very fabric of the universe, so that its geometry is not stable, consistent, or fixed at a tiny scale.

Wheeler illustrated the idea of spacetime foam using an analogy with the surface of the ocean, as retold by theoretical physicist Y. Jack Ng at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, in an email:

Imagine yourself flying a plane over an ocean. At high altitudes the ocean appears smooth. But as you descend, it begins to show roughness. Close enough to the ocean surface, you see bubbles and foam. Analogously, spacetime appears smooth on large scales; but on sufficiently small scales, it will appear rough and foamy.

Professor Steven Carlip at University of California, Davis, published new research in September that builds on Wheeler's quantum foam theory to show that spacetime bubbles could “hide” the cosmological constant at a large scale.

“There are so many different proposals [to solve the cosmological constant problem], and a good sign for my research is that none of them is very widely accepted,” Carlip said in an interview. “I thought it was worth looking for an approach that was less ad hoc, that might come from things we knew or suspected from elsewhere.”

The idea is that in spacetime foam, every point in spacetime has the huge amount of vacuum energy—the lowest energy state equivalent to "empty space"—predicted by quantum theory, but behaves differently to other points. For any particular way in which a point in spacetime is behaving, the exact opposite is equally as likely to occur at another point in spacetime. This is the feature of spacetime foam which “cancels out” the extra energy and expansions at a tiny scale, resulting in the lower energy that we observe at the scale of the whole universe.

For this to work, one has to assume that at the quantum level, time has no intrinsic "direction." In other words, there is no "arrow of time." According to Carlip, in the quantum world, this isn't such a wild suggestion. “Most physicists would agree that we don't know at a fundamental level why there's an arrow of time at all,” he said. “The idea that it's somehow 'emergent' on larger scales has been around for a long time.”

Carlip calls spacetime foam a “complex microscopic structure." It can almost be thought of as an expanding universe formed by tiny expanding and contracting universes at every point in spacetime. Carlip believes it’s possible that over time, the expanding areas of spacetime each replicate the complicated structure, and are themselves filled with tiny universes at every point.

Another paper published in August 2019 explores this scenario more thoroughly. Authors Qingdi Wang and William G. Unruh at the University of British Columbia suggest that every point in spacetime cycles through expansion and contraction, like tiny versions of our universe. Every point in spacetime, they say, is a “microcyclic universe”, endlessly moving from singularity, to a Big Bang, and finally collapse, on repeat.

The tiniest computers in the universe and a theory of everything

Quantum foam is having something of a moment, not just as a solution to the Cosmological Constant Problem, but also to address other enigmas in physics, like black holes, quantum computers, and dark energy.

A forthcoming article by Ng suggests that spacetime foam holds the key to finally unify and explain phenomenon at both a quantum and cosmological scale, moving us towards the elusive Theory of Everything. Such a theory would explain areas of physics which are currently independent, and at times conflicting, under one coherent framework.

Like Carlip, Ng also derives the large value for a positive cosmological constant using a model of spacetime bubbles. But to do so, he treats the "bubbles" in quantum foam as the universe’s tiniest computers, encoding and processing information.

Remember: quantum foam contains bubbles of uncertainty in space and time. To measure how "bubbly" spacetime is, Ng suggests a thought experiment involving clocks clustered in a spherical volume of spacetime which transmit and receive light signals and measure the time it takes for the signals to be received.

“This process of mapping the geometry is a sort of computation, in which distances are gauged by transmitting and processing information," he wrote in his paper.

Using other known relationships between energy and quantum computation, and the limit on mass inside the sphere to avoid forming a black hole, Ng argued that the uncertainty built into the quantum-scale universe that determines how accurately (or inaccurately) we can measure the geometry of spacetime also limits the maximum amount of information these bubble-computers can store and their computing power.

Extending this result for the entire universe rather than an isolated volume of spacetime, Ng shows that spacetime foam is equivalent to dark energy and dark matter, since ordinary matter would not be capable of storing and computing the maximum amount of information he derives from the measurement task.

“The existence of spacetime foam, with the aid of thermodynamic considerations, appears to imply the co-existence of a dark sector (in addition to ordinary matter),” Ng told Motherboard. “This line of research is not common within the physics community, but it makes (physical) sense to me.”

The key takeaway from Ng's work is is: not only can spacetime foam be measured and explored conceptually, but it can also explain the acceleration of the universe by connecting quantum physics, general relativity and dark energy. Ng believes a Theory of Everything is within reach.

“Eventually what I’d like to explore and, more importantly, what I would like to encourage others to explore, is to go beyond the consideration of spacetime foam, and to see whether both quantum mechanics and gravitation are emergent phenomena, and whether thermodynamics (whose protagonist is entropy) holds the key to understand the laws of nature," he said.

The future of foam research

Conceptually, spacetime foam reconciles and explains many of the outstanding problems between quantum physics and cosmology. Still, both Ng and Carlip are calling for more work to be done to truly understand the nature of spacetime.

Carlip is working on a quantitative model of spacetime foam to supplement the theoretical model currently on the table. He’s calling the model “minisuperspace," and is hopeful that physicists researching other approaches in the quantum-cosmology intersection could find examples of the model in their own work, if they know to look for it. To start with, Carlip says he’ll be looking at some numerical simulations to support the foam model.

Going beyond a simple quantitative model will need an all hands on deck approach. “I'd love to have people who are working on various approaches to quantum gravity, string theory, loop quantum gravity, asymptotic safety, etc., look for this kind of phenomenon in their work to see if a connection can be made,” Carlip said.

Ng echoed the desire for more dedicated research which spans boundaries between different areas of theoretical physics. But his hope is even grander: for a unified theory which ties together quantum mechanics, gravity, and thermodynamics to explain the universe's mysteries.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3k48qv/the-42-biggest-questions-about-life-the-universe-and-everything
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
3,002
1,916
113
Simulation theory is like invoking god, it is giving up. There is no prospect of us reaching beyond the simulation if we are in a simulation, there is no question that can not be answered with "because it is a simulation" if we believe it is a simulation.

I always thought that when physicists mention quantum foam they meant the sea of virtual particles that every inch of the universe is bathed in, never realized that it had to do with micro-universes.
 

The Hof

New member
Mar 18, 2015
265
0
0
Simulation theory is like invoking god, it is giving up. There is no prospect of us reaching beyond the simulation if we are in a simulation, there is no question that can not be answered with "because it is a simulation" if we believe it is a simulation.

I always thought that when physicists mention quantum foam they meant the sea of virtual particles that every inch of the universe is bathed in, never realized that it had to do with micro-universes.
Except.... no again. Neither invoking god, nor giving up.

God is an omnipotent being that simply exists and judges your soul not unlike Santa Claus, but only once in your life and not like a yearly performance review. A civilization that has eclipsed our ability to understand its means or motives is not not the same thing at all.

And give up why? Simulation or not, I intuit the laughter, the fears, the pain and curiosity the way I intuit them. Prove to me it’s evolution, divine intervention or a science experiment. I’m making the exact same choices tomorrow.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,510
1,149
113
I agree with your first statement, however nobody judges you. That is a very selfish, egotistical thing to say and what takes us further away from achieving full consciousness and awareness. It’s like saying be good to receive a reward or pray so you can go to heaven bullshit or treat others how you want to be treated. It is a control tactic invented by humans through the exploitation of our faith in god which undermines our own potential because we try to control others. Why can’t we just accept people and stop changing and manipulating them to become how we believe. Why not just let the people figure it out on their own within the confines of our society and governance structure and just BE who they think they are. Let people dig inside their own core and figure it out on their own regardless how long it takes.

God is infinite and in everything and everywhere. We are just a spiritual division of the infinite and live infinite until we become fully aware we are a division of god and if you keep digging will realize you are god. What happens then once you realize this. I think we just keep repeating the process and keep dividing and refining the spirit through our infinite reincarnations and infinite lifetimes not just on earth but anywhere there is life. Presently we are spirits having a human experience and refining our spirits and becoming more aware and conscious.

I am still not there to fully believe that we are god, however I understand the logic. I am happy accepting we are all part of god. I know this because each time I feel love for some one or some thing I feel god like a warm blanket giving me comfort, harmony and making it all make sense.



Except.... no again. Neither invoking god, nor giving up.

God is an omnipotent being that simply exists and judges your soul not unlike Santa Claus, but only once in your life and not like a yearly performance review. A civilization that has eclipsed our ability to understand its means or motives is not not the same thing at all.

And give up why? Simulation or not, I intuit the laughter, the fears, the pain and curiosity the way I intuit them. Prove to me it’s evolution, divine intervention or a science experiment. I’m making the exact same choices tomorrow.
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,682
21
38
Except.... no again. Neither invoking god, nor giving up.

God is an omnipotent being that simply exists and judges your soul not unlike Santa Claus, but only once in your life and not like a yearly performance review. A civilization that has eclipsed our ability to understand its means or motives is not not the same thing at all.

And give up why? Simulation or not, I intuit the laughter, the fears, the pain and curiosity the way I intuit them. Prove to me it’s evolution, divine intervention or a science experiment. I’m making the exact same choices tomorrow.
I will pray for you.
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
3,002
1,916
113
Except.... no again. Neither invoking god, nor giving up.

God is an omnipotent being that simply exists and judges your soul not unlike Santa Claus, but only once in your life and not like a yearly performance review. A civilization that has eclipsed our ability to understand its means or motives is not not the same thing at all.

And give up why? Simulation or not, I intuit the laughter, the fears, the pain and curiosity the way I intuit them. Prove to me it’s evolution, divine intervention or a science experiment. I’m making the exact same choices tomorrow.
I am not using giving up in the sense of not wanting to live. I am saying giving up the pursuit of scientific mysteries.

If you are religious, you accept that god created the universe, no deeper explanation is warranted. If you believe in simulation theory, you accept that the universe started when the simulation began, no deeper explanation is warranted.

The fermi Paradox, if you are religious then god just wanted to create us and did not want to create alien life, if you believe in simulation theory then the simulator only cares to simulate us and not aliens. If you believe in neither, then there is motivation to invest into new telescopes, there is a new telescope that is comming online soon that can see the atmosphere of other planets in other solar systems. If we see wack stuff like CFCs in the atmosphere of another planet then we know with certainty that there is intelligent life on that planet.

Simulation theory puts an upper bound to what knowledge is available to us. The LHC particle accelerator, costs ~5 billion, the next bigger accelerator will cost 10 billion, our ability to absorb those costs is based on the dream that we can find deep truths about reality.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,510
1,149
113
I am not using giving up in the sense of not wanting to live. I am saying giving up the pursuit of scientific mysteries.

If you are religious, you accept that god created the universe, no deeper explanation is warranted. If you believe in simulation theory, you accept that the universe started when the simulation began, no deeper explanation is warranted.

The fermi Paradox, if you are religious then god just wanted to create us and did not want to create alien life, if you believe in simulation theory then the simulator only cares to simulate us and not aliens. If you believe in neither, then there is motivation to invest into new telescopes, there is a new telescope that is comming online soon that can see the atmosphere of other planets in other solar systems. If we see wack stuff like CFCs in the atmosphere of another planet then we know with certainty that there is intelligent life on that planet.

Simulation theory puts an upper bound to what knowledge is available to us. The LHC particle accelerator, costs ~5 billion, the next bigger accelerator will cost 10 billion, our ability to absorb those costs is based on the dream that we can find deep truths about reality.
How do you know it stops at the simulator. Who simulates the simulator?

Also you can be against religion, yet be very spiritual and believe in God like they discuss in Actualized.org based on the search for the absolute.

Also why do you assume god is like a human and chooses to create and thinks like we do. How do you know God is not everything, everywhere, and in everyone and is infinite intelligence we all have access to?

There is no doubt humans accessed this universal intelligence when creating religion however because humans can easily succumb to corruption anything they create like religion will ultimately lead people towards corruption through people vulnerabilities exploited through their faith.
 

Spacealien2

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2012
1,837
177
63
Heaven
Useless research like this is why we should stop funding most of the researchers in universities are undertaking. They are stealing tax payers money.
 

Spunky1

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2019
1,073
978
113
I Farted in the bathtub and it created a big bubble. I’m pretty sure I created a underwater universe.
 

luvyeah

🤡🌎
Oct 24, 2018
2,541
1,201
113
Useless research like this is why we should stop funding most of the researchers in universities are undertaking. They are stealing tax payers money.
I would argue this is a more acceptable way to use tax payer dollars, in trying to better understand the physical world. Discoveries and innovations in physics have never been a waste. It is usally some autistic mathematician fucks around, then a theoretical physicist solves or learns something else, and then well, an engineer actually does something useful often creating new technology. However, some other "academics" who just whine in the many social studies fields, particularly gender studies, well thats just a whole different story.

At least this has scientific backing, unlike other "studies" that are only there to indoctrinate young adults and produce more zombies to push specific political agendas.

Then again this artical is written by vice, not the best of journalism.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,510
1,149
113
It is the same as asking who created god.
People like Elon Musk say that there is a 1 in billion chance that this is base reality. They also say that there is no guarantee that the simulation stops 1 leve up and quite likely that it could go many levels deep. Think like now there are many games where you can play a game inside another game.

In your statement above you said
If you believe in simulation theory, you accept that the universe started when the simulation began, no deeper explanation is warranted.
This does not mean that the universe started where the simulation began. Which simulation? Which universe? In higher dimension universe could mean something completely different. Why would it not lead to a deeper explanation that may or may not be beyond our comprehension. Don’t box your mind in...empty your mind and be like water...

 

luvyeah

🤡🌎
Oct 24, 2018
2,541
1,201
113
just watch the matrix dood and make sure you take the redpill
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,510
1,149
113
just watch the matrix dood and make sure you take the redpill
Already did bro. Psychedelics permanently expand your mind and there is never going back to how you were before. This is the true red pill. They have proven this by taking scans of the brain before and after taking them. Question is are you ready for what awaits behind the red door?
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
3,002
1,916
113
People like Elon Musk say that there is a 1 in billion chance that this is base reality. They also say that there is no guarantee that the simulation stops 1 leve up and quite likely that it could go many levels deep. Think like now there are many games where you can play a game inside another game.

In your statement above you said

This does not mean that the universe started where the simulation began. Which simulation? Which universe? In higher dimension universe could mean something completely different. Why would it not lead to a deeper explanation that may or may not be beyond our comprehension. Don’t box your mind in...empty your mind and be like water...

What musk says in public might not be what he believes in private, and even if musk believed it he has no proof or evidence of it nor is he is a physicist.

There is no way to verify that we are in a simulation or not.

If I was the god programmer that runs the simulation, I would not run a simulation of this reality on a moral basis, it is full of too much pain and suffering.
 
Toronto Escorts