Is Spacetime a Closed Volume or a Convoluted Surface?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Antonio Lao
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Outside Spacetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of spacetime, specifically whether it can be conceptualized as a closed volume or a convoluted surface. Participants explore implications for both the microcosmos (elementary particles) and macrocosmos (cosmological structures), touching on theoretical frameworks and properties derived from these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that to fully understand the universe, a perspective outside of spacetime is necessary, though this perspective is deemed impossible to achieve.
  • Another participant questions whether the singularity can be characterized by an \Omega greater than 1.
  • A participant introduces Brane world cosmology, proposing that it allows for a cosmological reality without a definitive beginning or end, while still discussing concepts like critical density.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of Andrey Kravtsov's model, suggesting that if supersymmetry existed in the early universe, it could influence our understanding of spacetime and gravity.
  • One participant posits that the microcosmos is not completely closed, as physical properties can still be derived from it, while the big bang singularity is considered a closed object from which no information can be derived.
  • The openness or closeness of the macrocosmos remains undecided, as participants acknowledge their position within it limits their perspective.
  • It is noted that the \Omega of spacetime in the macrocosmos cannot be definitively determined by current cosmological studies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether spacetime is closed or convoluted, with no consensus reached on the nature of spacetime in relation to the microcosmos and macrocosmos. Multiple competing perspectives are presented without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various theoretical models and frameworks, indicating that their arguments depend on specific assumptions and interpretations of cosmological concepts. There are unresolved questions regarding the implications of these models on the understanding of spacetime.

Antonio Lao
Messages
1,436
Reaction score
1
Everything in the universe is inside of spacetime. But in order to fully understand the universe, the vantage point must be outside of spacetime. This point of view is impossible to reach. For the quantum universe of the elementary particles, an "inside" exists for all particles. This "inside" can give properties of mass, charge, spin, and magnetic dipole moment. But will we ever be able to see in? Will we be able to see the "inside" of the singularity?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Can we say that the singularity has an [itex]\Omega > 1[/itex]?
 
In Brane world cosmology there is no beginning and end, yet the ideas of critical density can still be spoken too?

Andrey Kravtsov model let's us understand that there is this basis to a cosmological reality and that if we were to consider the strings, how would we see such congregations? In the early universe supersymmetric points woud point to supergravity

So we look at the nature of such congregations and try and define this dynamical movement. Let's say that in the early universe supersymmetry was a reality, then what was first shown by Andrey, let's us know the basis of that reality as all pervasive? But, if the reality is to include gravity how would you retain time, but as a dimensional value in the strengths and weakness of that gravity field?

what has been revealed in mass considerations? http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/thorne/oh/03.html

The solidifcation of the model of Andrey's reveals time a dimensionally significant?

But I then, wanted to add this last statement for you as well.

http://www.superstringtheory.com/forum/topboard/messages3/39.html

So we needed a way in which to capture this cyclical nature. A black hole does not necessarily assume critical density, but instead ignites and turns to fission?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sol2,

Thanks for these wealth of information.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss whether spacetime is closed like a volume or a convoluted surface.

I think the microcosmos (such as an electron or a quark) is not completely closed (closed surface) since we still can derived physical properties from it like mass, charge, spin, and magnetic moment. The big bang singularity (or black hole) is a closed object since we cannot derived any information from it.

The openness and closeness of the macrocosmos cannot be decided since we are living inside it instead of looking from a vantage point outside.

The spacetime of the microworld is not closed. The [itex]\Omega[/itex] of spacetime of the macroworld cannot be positively decided by modern cosmological studies.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K