Could Parallel Universes Really Collide?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parallel universes and the possibility of their collision, exploring theoretical implications, conservation laws, and the nature of existence within a multiverse framework. Participants examine various models and scenarios related to the multiverse paradigm, wormholes, and the conservation of energy in these contexts.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if wormholes exist between parallel universes, collisions could occur, raising questions about the nature of the space between these universes and the need for a background framework.
  • Another participant raises concerns about conservation of energy, arguing that the transfer of objects between universes via wormholes could lead to energy gain in our universe if the processes are not symmetric.
  • A different viewpoint posits that the collision of parallel universes would represent a topological change, complicating existing models like Linde's eternal chaotic universe.
  • One participant questions the necessity of a background for the existence of multiple universes, proposing that they could exist simultaneously and discussing the implications of particle behavior in accelerators as evidence of interlinked universes.
  • Another participant argues that if a parallel universe were to collide with ours, it would become part of our universe, suggesting that the homogeneity of our universe contradicts the likelihood of such collisions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the existence of a background for the multiverse, the implications of wormholes, and the conservation of energy, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various theoretical frameworks and models, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the nature of energy conservation and the mechanics of universe interactions. The discussion does not reach a definitive conclusion on these points.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
If we were to take the multiverse paradigm, and there are multitude of universes which do not intersect and thus don't collide, to truly be parallel there shouldn't even be a wormhole between the universes.

Suppose that wormholes were a possibility, and they were stable, then also the possiblity of collision between parallel universes would be a possibility (like the alleged collision that should happen between the milky way and andromeda if I'm not mistaken), which makes me ponder, shouldn't we need a background also for this multiverse, what there is between these universes, are the universes dense such that the question is there something in between is meaningless?

Are there any textbooks which detail my specific connundrums, perhaps Weinberg's and Piran's: "Quantum Cosmology and baby universes"?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Another thing that popped into my head right now, is if there were other universes and there were wormholes between possible universes, then in this process objects foreign in one universe (i.e weren't detectable in it) would transfer from the foreign universe and vice versa, wouldn't this exchange violate conservation of energy, we might gain more energy in our universe in this exchange if the processes isn't symmetric, e.g we create a wormhole in the other universe in a place which has less mass from the place in our universe which we started the wormhole.
Ofcourse also particles can get lost when the link between the universes is destroyed, and then what'd be with them?
 
Parallel 'universe's colliding would be a topological change, which complicates a model; likewise for Linde's eternal chaotic universe, with budding of baby universes. Also the antithesis of quanta and manifold of our "universe', would be simply there absence; unless something ad hoc were added, like a 21th century ether.
 
But why does there need to be anything in the background for these universes to exist in? If there is a multiverse, couldn't all of them exist simultaneously? Note that in particle accelerators, when two particles are created, one disappears almost instantly. Where does it go? According to currently accepted universal laws of conservation, they can't simply have just ceased to exist, they need to exist somewhere. Also note, in these same accelerators, matter seems to pop into existence out of nowhere.

Now, take these two different events and combine them. It would appear that perhaps we are witnessing the same event from two different angles. When a particle disappears out of our universe, it appears, seamingly out of nothing, in the other universe.

The laws of conservation in the multiverse would be practically uniform across all of the various universes. In this case, no matter is truly lost, merely transported to a different area, and, being interlinked much the same way all systems on Earth are linked, there is no true loss in anyone area, since all areas are in fact, the same area. It would follow that it is our own flawed perceptions of the mechanics of the universe which leads to a perception of separate yet equal universes.
 
A parallel universe colliding with our universe would necessarily become part of our universe. This is a non starter. We live in an amazingly homogenous universe, which tends to refute the prospects of any 'collision' with parallel universes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
25K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K