I have a question regarding LQC that I can't find anywhere, and since most of the relevant answers to similar questions are here I may as well ask, here...(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

For a simple background, when I was introduced to the big rip and combined that with the big bang, I immediately thought the two co-existed in a cycle. But the question was in how they combine to a cycle.

LQC seems to validate what happens in-between these two events, and so does seem to validate the big bang, the big rip, and what is in-between these events.

Before I was aware of LQC, I read a paper that I cannot find online anymore that some scientists calculated backwards in time past 0, and found it arrived in an entirely new time...

We would think that all of this 'evidence' confirms what we all assume outside of physics as computer scientists. (note: if you want to prove these theories, all we really need to do since we will never observe them ourselves is to put them into computer simulations and see what happens)...

Knowing these things, I still can't find an answer to a simple problem that plagues me with something I need to get across to people:

Q = Given a cyclic nature of all of this, and that time is either 2,3,4 dimensional instead of 1, the real question then becomes what happens as we keep going not just into the time of 1 universe before this one (which was already done), but as we keep going 2,3,4,5,6...N universes before this one??

The reason for doing this is not to prove any theory, exactly, but rather to display the exact properties of time as it relates to space expansion, implosion, bounce, and re-expansion.

The idea is simple - given you create a computer calculation given a proper and accurate time equasion that we can use to calculate backwards in time 1..N universes in the past, we then collect in a file these two things:

(a) the exact time the universe before ours ended

(b) the exact time the universe before that one ended.

(c) ...continue.

This proves one of two things about the properties of time that I think everyone is failing to acknowledge right now, being caught up in the in-between of big bang and big rip...

1. In this computer loop, we can easily state whether time as it relates to space is only two-dimensional if it forms a circle that never changes, thereby assuming that if we tie most of modern physics together, time would form a circle on a x,y plane (regardless of its actual shape) and therefore the end of (a), (b), (c).. above would be exactly the same number...

2. If it is the case that (a) > (b) > (c), this would tell us with a lot of mathematical certainty that time is three dimensional in this form of reality, just like space, since we can assume if time's end on each universe is larger than the previous, it actually confirms the *idea* of Einstein that the universe is infinite, which either way we have already basically proven looking at only time itself.

The difference here is being able to determine whether time forms a circular, 2D pattern, or an ever-expanding sphere, 3D pattern like space. Knowing this will be entirely revealing, and it is something I can't even find appropriate equations anywhere to even start building a computer algorithm to start calculating - that is why I am turning to you all...

Keep in mind, I know LQC assumes a cyclical pattern. 1&2 are both cyclical patterns. The difference here is like this - assume time is the frames of a video. Each frame represents time as it expands in this universe. The space segment is the 3D video. We can also relay in simple to describe terms other notions of relativity if we imagine a video...

So what happens at the big rip? We are at the last frame of our universe, or video. What happens between that and the big bang? Either it will play the same video in a different way (like our notion of a multiverse), or it will instead play an entirely different video (again, like our notion of a multiverse).

What happens to our next video can be proven by a computer run, or simulation of our equations, by merely plugging in realistic numbers. We cannot prove things we can't observe ourselves or test ourselves by any other means, we can only simulate them on a computer to try and prove their validity and therefore reveal to us 'what happens'...

So that brings me back to the original question - given that the universe is cyclical, *how* is it cyclical? And the answer is whether or not we know the exact calculations of when each universe before this one ends as it relates to time. We should, like I said, observe (a)=(b)=(c)=(..N) (constant, circular, 2D) or (a)>(b)>(c)>(...N=0) (absolute beginning, spherical, 3D).

If you already have the answer to this, I would love to know it. If none of you do, you're in luck: I'm an excellently unemployed computer programmer due to market conditions and societal conditions in the US - if you can explain the equasion and I can understand it and its variables, I can compute and answer this for you....

Thanks,

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Big Bang, big rip, lQc, has anyone ever run a computer simulation?

Tags:

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**