The Big Leak, Universe Equilibrium, Time

[Erus]

Wouldn't an expansion be sort of like the effect of equilibrium? What is it that disagrees with this idea? Of a 'Big Leak' rather than a Big Bang. Does not all matter in the universe tend to reach a state of equilibrium? Why wouldn't the Universe as a whole try to do such? And I think, wouldn't Space be sort of like a container? Also Time be made of the Space/Distance within the container? (spacetime). When you add Water to a Container, the Container does not expand. When you add sugar to this water, the effect I am thinking of occurs.

Do you think Life would occur without Night time? Would our sleeping schedule be the same? The way I think of time, biological clock, and the idea of physical time is that what happens if you sleep only 2 hours when you're used to sleeping 8 hours? You feel the effects of the time right?

Some questions.. Hope to get some replies.

 

[marcus]

Wouldn't an expansion be sort of like the effect of equilibrium? What is it that disagrees with this idea? Of a 'Big Leak' rather than a Big Bang. Does not all matter in the universe tend to reach a state of equilibrium? Why wouldn't the Universe as a whole try to do such? And I think, wouldn't Space be sort of like a container? Also Time be made of the Space/Distance within the container? (spacetime). When you add Water to a Container, the Container does not expand. When you add sugar to this water, the effect I am thinking of occurs.

Do you think Life would occur without Night time? Would our sleeping schedule be the same? The way I think of time, biological clock, and the idea of physical time is that what happens if you sleep only 2 hours when you're used to sleeping 8 hours? You feel the effects of the time right?

Some questions.. Hope to get some replies.

there is this great line about limitation of thinking in metaphors, it is in the movie As Good as it Gets and Jack Nicholson speaks the line in a restaurant.
Thank you for these speculations. I will try to get back to you about the Big Leak at a later time, when I have thought about it a little.

Please read smolin's paper "Scientific Alternatives to the Anthropic Principle" which has an empirically testable model of how one universe may leak into another. the paper has no formulas to speak of so it
should be readable (to a first approximation) by any literate person.

http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0407213

just click on "PDF" it is only about 40 pages and the first 10 or so should give you the idea.

 

[Deeviant]

This isn't exactely a the right forum for those questions but I'll do my best to answer nevertheless.


I'm am not positive what exactely you are asking about the big bang. In case of the big bang, it is space that is expanding, so yes the "container" is in fact expanding. The most probable end result of such exapansion will be something of an equilibrium as expanding space will spread matter out so thiny and far apart, the universe will basically just be a very thin soup of dead star matter, with smatterings of black hole remanants and dark cold matter.

The biggest challenge to the statement that the big bang is a process of equilibrium is the fact that the very word equilibrium implies that the system is unchanging, I know of no models of the universe that lead to a static system.

As far as the night issue. It is far more complex than simply an issue of time. If Earth did not have night, it would certainly be a very different place, and indeed life may never might of had the chance to form, yet it would be very impossible for Earth to not have a night time in our solar system.

The only way I can think of a planet not having a night is to be a binary star system(a solar system with two stars) and for the orbits to somehow work out for the light of both stars to strike all the parts of a planet at the same time. A planet in such a situation would most likely be a scorched, uninhabitable place, such as Venus. So if Earth had no night, I would guess that life would not be possible and that the view on time would be very different, different as in non-existant.