- #1
NthDeegree
- 2
- 0
I am quite familiar with 11-dimensional string theory and with the concept that the other seven dimensions outside of the four we can perceive are, in theory, curled too tightly (meaning too small) for us to see.
However, is it possible that instead of being too small, they are too large?
Assume, for a moment, that there exists an eleven dimensional hyper-sphere (hyper-space) and its surface is a zero energy sheet. A random fluctuation occurs on a portion of the surface and the sheet separates producing a negative and a positive energy bubble each with four dimensions. Within each bubble a tremendous amount of energy would be released (i.e. a Big Bang). The rest is history.
Further, imagine that each particle (string) within those bubbles (branes) is still “connected” to the hyper-sphere. Companion particles would be connected through the hyper-sphere whether they are an inch or light years apart. If you then change one of the properties of one of the connected particles, that change would be immediately “transmitted” to its companion particle which would then exhibit the change as well. It would help explain the entanglement phenomena.
There was a theory (Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory) proposed by Louis de Broglie and later, by David Bohm that, basically, advanced the idea that there is a guiding wave (pilot wave) that transmits the change between companion particles and would have the properties of being faster than light and would not lose any of its energy regardless of how far it traveled.
So if indeed, particles are connected through hyper-space, they would exist virtually side-by-side in hyper-space regardless of how far apart they are in our universe. It would do away with the issues of the Pilot Wave Theory (i.e. faster than light and no loss of energy over any distance).
Another thought on the hyper-sphere idea. If our universe was the positive bubble would the negative bubble have had its own Big Bang and would it be composed of ant-matter? It would explain why we see so little anti-matter in our universe even though, statistically, our universe should be half and half.
So am I totally off base or is there some merit?
However, is it possible that instead of being too small, they are too large?
Assume, for a moment, that there exists an eleven dimensional hyper-sphere (hyper-space) and its surface is a zero energy sheet. A random fluctuation occurs on a portion of the surface and the sheet separates producing a negative and a positive energy bubble each with four dimensions. Within each bubble a tremendous amount of energy would be released (i.e. a Big Bang). The rest is history.
Further, imagine that each particle (string) within those bubbles (branes) is still “connected” to the hyper-sphere. Companion particles would be connected through the hyper-sphere whether they are an inch or light years apart. If you then change one of the properties of one of the connected particles, that change would be immediately “transmitted” to its companion particle which would then exhibit the change as well. It would help explain the entanglement phenomena.
There was a theory (Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory) proposed by Louis de Broglie and later, by David Bohm that, basically, advanced the idea that there is a guiding wave (pilot wave) that transmits the change between companion particles and would have the properties of being faster than light and would not lose any of its energy regardless of how far it traveled.
So if indeed, particles are connected through hyper-space, they would exist virtually side-by-side in hyper-space regardless of how far apart they are in our universe. It would do away with the issues of the Pilot Wave Theory (i.e. faster than light and no loss of energy over any distance).
Another thought on the hyper-sphere idea. If our universe was the positive bubble would the negative bubble have had its own Big Bang and would it be composed of ant-matter? It would explain why we see so little anti-matter in our universe even though, statistically, our universe should be half and half.
So am I totally off base or is there some merit?