The forum discussion centers on Lawrence Krauss's assertions regarding the universe's flatness and infinite spatial extent, as presented in his 2009 talk. Participants debate the implications of an infinite universe in relation to the Big Bang theory and the finite mass of the universe, questioning how these concepts can coexist. The discussion highlights the distinction between empirical evidence and philosophical interpretations in cosmology, emphasizing that Krauss's statements, while entertaining, lack rigorous scientific grounding. The consensus is that while Krauss is a respected physicist, his popular presentations may lead to confusion among lay audiences regarding complex cosmological concepts.
PREREQUISITESCosmologists, physics students, science communicators, and anyone interested in the complexities of modern cosmology and the public understanding of scientific concepts.
Chalnoth said:No, not at all! It's just what we expect to happen everywhere from time to time.
Well, from our perspective, it looks like a microscopic black hole that almost instantly evaporates. But inside this microscopic black hole, the space-time becomes sort of twisted enough that a piece of it pinches off and expands on its own, independent of our universe.
revo74 said:What evidence or reasoning is there that supports this concept?
Right now we don't have enough evidence to say for sure, but the general expectation is that the laws can be quite different every time.revo74 said:So universes give rise to other universes. Do the laws of physics remain the same. Are these new universes essentially clones?
In general this sort of idea is very much at the frontier of knowledge. The models we have today seem to suggest that this kind of thing is possible, but it's very difficult to say what actually happens in this regime. So for the most part, this should be filed under, "Possible idea. Needs work."revo74 said:Would this be common sense speculation? After all the entire idea that our Universe is a special virtual particle is highly speculative to begin with.
What evidence or reasoning is there that supports this concept?