Do cyclic models of the universe

_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?
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top