On the Universe being a single whole particle

[untilthecern]

TL;DR

What if the universe is just a single particle behaving the same at every unit-volume?

I was thinking about the quantum entanglement and a thing just confused my mind, if two entangled particle show the exact opposite values independently of time and location and if I suppose that there is trillions of entagled states in our universe, shouldn't everything be connected each other like a whole? Also, if the big-bang started from a unit-point, so shouldn't the whole universe remain the same behave as the starting point? So, if the entropy in a system is conserving, shouldn't the energy that blackholes absorbing affect tho whole universe's space-time structure -like adding the absorbed energy to every space heterogeneously-? Is there any resources mentioning this theory that I can look into?

 

[.Scott]

TL;DR: What if the universe is just a single particle behaving the same at every unit-volume?

The term "particle" has been claimed for something different in the universe. So, let's not call the whole universe a "particle".

I was thinking about the quantum entanglement and a thing just confused my mind, if two entangled particle show the exact opposite values independently of time and location and if I suppose that there is trillions of entagled states in our universe, shouldn't everything be connected each other like a whole?

At the conceptual level, I think what you're wondering about is whether, given just one small piece of the universe (like a single cubic meter), could you deduce what the rest of the universe must be?
In the most direct interpretation of that question, the answer is "no". Any single volume of space has a limit (the Bekenstein Bound) to how much information it can pack. A cubic meter cannot hold the total amount of information in the universe.
In a less direct interpretation of "could you", in principle it might possible that a single cubic meter of the universe could be used to deduce all of Physics. Given those laws of Physics, it might turn out that only one universe is possible.

What is possible (according to the most accepted Physics) is to fully describe the content of a volume knowing only it's surface (but absolutely everything about that surface). It's called the Holographic Principle.

Also, if the big-bang started from a unit-point, so shouldn't the whole universe remain the same behave as the starting point?

There are lots of theories about the earliest moments of the big bang. Even if you claim that it involves a singularity, that's not exactly a point.

So, if the entropy in a system is conserving,

Entropy is not conserved.

shouldn't the energy that blackholes absorbing affect tho whole universe's space-time structure -like adding the absorbed energy to every space heterogeneously-? Is there any resources mentioning this theory that I can look into?

Any activity in the universe can have effects that spread from that activity through surrounding space - it doesn't have to be a black hole.
Moving mass from inside outside the event horizon of a black hole shares the same effects of the universe that non-black-hole such activity creates.

It's very unclear what you mean by "this theory", but the ultimate restoring of what black holes have consumed to the outside universe is most famously addressed under the title "Hawking Radiation"

 

[javisot]

TL;DR:Is there any resources mentioning this theory that I can look into?

No.

So...

 

[untilthecern]

The term "particle" has been claimed for something different in the universe. So, let's not call the whole universe a "particle".




At the conceptual level, I think what you're wondering about is whether, given just one small piece of the universe (like a single cubic meter), could you deduce what the rest of the universe must be?
In the most direct interpretation of that question, the answer is "no". Any single volume of space has a limit (the Bekenstein Bound) to how much information it can pack. A cubic meter cannot hold the total amount of information in the universe.
In a less direct interpretation of "could you", in principle it might possible that a single cubic meter of the universe could be used to deduce all of Physics. Given those laws of Physics, it might turn out that only one universe is possible.

What is possible (according to the most accepted Physics) is to fully describe the content of a volume knowing only it's surface (but absolutely everything about that surface). It's called the Holographic Principle.


There are lots of theories about the earliest moments of the big bang. Even if you claim that it involves a singularity, that's not exactly a point.

Entropy is not conserved.

Any activity in the universe can have effects that spread from that activity through surrounding space - it doesn't have to be a black hole.
Moving mass from inside outside the event horizon of a black hole shares the same effects of the universe that non-black-hole such activity creates.

It's very unclear what you mean by "this theory", but the ultimate restoring of what black holes have consumed to the outside universe is most famously addressed under the title "Hawking Radiation"

One-electron Universe

I meant this theory but I struggled to explain it. You are right about the terms I used, I should be said "conservation of energy" while giving example. I just trying to say that just as positrons originate from a single entity in this theory, I wondered if every volume of the entire universe might also be interconnected. In other words, the idea occurred to me that the universe's initial singularity might be preserved, and I wondered whether this was true or false.

 

[PeterDonis]

I meant this theory

That isn't a theory. It's a speculation that never turned into anything useful theoretically. It plays no role in our best current model of the universe or anything else.

 

[PeterDonis]

And with that, this thread is closed.