Do cyclic models of the universe

Click For Summary
Cyclic models of the universe, such as Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology and the Ekpyrotic universe, propose that the universe undergoes eternal cycles without a definitive beginning or end. The discussion centers on whether the history of these cycles can be classified as countably or uncountably infinite, with some arguing for a countably infinite set since cycles can be mapped to integers. If the cycles are countably infinite, it raises the question of whether identical cycles could occur more than once or if each cycle is unique. The concept of Poincaré recurrence suggests that in a finite phase space, identical situations could repeat over time. The phase space in this context may measure variables like possible energies at the big bang.
_heretic
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I have a question as to the actual nature of cyclic models of the universe (e.g. Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology or the Ekpyrotic universe) - essentially where the universe has no beginning or end it simply goes through cycles eternally in both time directions. So in these situations would the entire history of the universe be considered to be mathematically an countably infinite or uncountably infinite as a set? That is, would each cycle (e.g. big bang to big crunch) be classed as an element of a countably infinite set or an uncountably infinite one?

Furthermore, if the set of these cycles was countably infinite would that mean that each cycle (i.e one in which there is an Earth and this post of the Physics Forums) could only ever occur **once** in the entire history of the universe. (?) Or would it mean that each cycle could have identical "looking" cycles later on. i.e at time N1 we encounter cycle A in which there is an Earth with this post on the Physics Forums, and later, at time N2 we encounter cycle B in which there is a situation functionally the same as in cycle A: Identical planet with identical post on identical network which, for all intents and purposes, is then the same as cycle A (?)

Thanks in advance!
 
Space news on Phys.org
Anyone? :confused:
 
_heretic said:
So in these situations would the entire history of the universe be considered to be mathematically an countably infinite or uncountably infinite as a set? That is, would each cycle (e.g. big bang to big crunch) be classed as an element of a countably infinite set or an uncountably infinite one?

Countably infinite since you can map everything to integers.

Furthermore, if the set of these cycles was countably infinite would that mean that each cycle (i.e one in which there is an Earth and this post of the Physics Forums) could only ever occur **once** in the entire history of the universe. (?) Or would it mean that each cycle could have identical "looking" cycles later on. i.e at time N1 we encounter cycle A in which there is an Earth with this post on the Physics Forums, and later, at time N2 we encounter cycle B in which there is a situation functionally the same as in cycle A: Identical planet with identical post on identical network which, for all intents and purposes, is then the same as cycle A (?)

It's called Poincaire recurrence, but if you have the universe a situation in which you have countably infinite universes in a non-infinite phase space (i.e. you have infinite universes but the number of possible universes is finite) then mathematically things will repeat.

Yes this does lead to weird things which bothers people.
 
Thanks for the info twofish-quant :smile: Just to clarify though, in terms of universe cycles what would the phase space be likely measuring? e.g. Possible energies at the big bang?
 
I always thought it was odd that we know dark energy expands our universe, and that we know it has been increasing over time, yet no one ever expressed a "true" size of the universe (not "observable" universe, the ENTIRE universe) by just reversing the process of expansion based on our understanding of its rate through history, to the point where everything would've been in an extremely small region. The more I've looked into it recently, I've come to find that it is due to that "inflation"...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
Replies
18
Views
10K