Fecund Universe Theory: How Different Are Baby Universes?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hammertime
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Lee Smolin's fecund universe theory posits that baby universes emerge from black holes, each with slightly different fundamental constants. The CNS conjecture suggests that the standard model and cosmological parameters are optimized for black hole production. Current technology allows for testing this conjecture, which has been under examination for over a decade. The theory implies that a universe conducive to black hole formation also supports carbon-based life, although this is a secondary consideration to the conjecture's validity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of black hole physics
  • Familiarity with the standard model of particle physics
  • Knowledge of cosmological parameters
  • Basic concepts of stellar evolution and collapse
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Lee Smolin's CNS conjecture and its implications
  • Explore the relationship between black hole formation and cosmological constants
  • Study the physics of stellar collapse and its observational techniques
  • Investigate the conditions necessary for carbon-based life in varying universes
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, cosmologists, and anyone interested in the implications of black hole formation on the nature of the universe and the potential for life in varying cosmic conditions.

hammertime
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
According to Lee Smolin's theory of fecund universes, baby universes sprout off of ours through black holes, yet their fundamental constants of nature are slightly different. How different are they? Are they so different that life as we know it would not be able to exist in them?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Last year Smolin posted a paper on the current status of his CNS conjecture. If you are interested you can look it up.

As I understand it, the CNS conjecture is that the standard model and cosmology parameters are approximately optimal for black hole production (at or near a local maximum).

This is the sort of prediction that we can test with current technology and, in a sense, have already been testing for over ten years. It requires understanding the physics of stellar collapse and making observations. So far the CNS conjecture is still standing.

If, for the sake of argument, you accept the conjecture that the standard parameters (particle masses, coupling constants, cosmology constants...) are optimal for black hole formation, then you can think up explanations HOW it could have gotten that way.

One way is what you said, namely that the formation of a black hole leads to a bigbang but possibly with SLIGHTLY different values of some parameters, which just BARELY change the abundance of black holes in the next expanding region.

this would promote evolution towards a set of parameters favoring black holes and likewise (it turns out) favoring familiar carbonbase types of life but that is irrelevant to the conjecture. it just turns out that a universe tuned to produce a lot of black holes is also hospitable to carbonbase life on rocky planets around stable stars. Carbon chemistry helps in the generation of stars by providing pathways to radiate away heat. The fusion processes that yield heavier elements aiding star formation also provide the elements needed to make earthlike (rocky) planets instead of merely gas giants. So life is an irrelevant byproduct of an evolutionary process that favors the production of black holes, in this scheme.

I think the main question is not how to explain the odd coincidence that the parameters seem welladjusted for black holes. the main question is whether they in fact ARE approximately ideal for that! If they are that would certainly be very strange and require some kind of explanation.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K