I Inflation Models that don't produce Multiverse?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter cosmanino2050
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Inflation models can be categorized based on whether they produce a multiverse, defined as pocket or bubble universes formed during eternal inflation. Models like chaotic and hybrid inflation are noted for potentially generating multiverses, while non-eternal inflation models do not. The discussion highlights that eternal inflation leads to an infinite multiverse due to the rapid reproduction of inflating regions, whereas models that stop inflation shortly after it begins do not share this characteristic. The scientific community remains divided on the implications of multiverse theories in relation to the viability of inflationary models. Overall, understanding the distinctions between these models is crucial for grasping the broader implications of cosmic inflation.
cosmanino2050
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
What are inflation models that don't produce multiverse?
What are inflation models that don't produce multiverse?
 
Space news on Phys.org
What are inflation models that produce multiverse? What do you mean by multiverse? Any sources you are reading?
 
I
weirdoguy said:
What are inflation models that produce multiverse? What do you mean by multiverse? Any sources you are reading?
I mean by multiverse these pocket or bubble universes which are produced during eternal inflation. I don't have a broad idea, but I think models like chaotic inflation or hybrid inflation do produce them.
 
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.27.2848

This paper is often cited as showing eternal inflation producing a multiverse is generic, and therefore inflation without this feature must be very special. As to a specific model known to be free of this, I don ‘t know - this is not something I know much about.
 
cosmanino2050 said:
TL;DR Summary: What are inflation models that don't produce multiverse?

What are inflation models that don't produce multiverse?
In many models, the inflationary phase of the Universe's expansion lasts forever in at least some regions of the Universe. This occurs because inflating regions expand very rapidly, reproducing themselves. Unless the rate of decay to the non-inflating phase is sufficiently fast, new inflating regions are produced more rapidly than non-inflating regions. In such models, most of the volume of the Universe is continuously inflating at any given time.

All models of eternal inflation produce an infinite, hypothetical multiverse, typically a fractal. The multiverse theory has created significant dissension in the scientific community about the viability of the inflationary model.

From Wikipedia: Cosmic Inflation.

But, as the linked article discusses, there are all sorts of inflation models and "eternal inflation" to which this hypothesis applies, is only one of them. (Some time ago, I saw a catalog of inflation theories in a paper on arXiv that listed more than a hundred distinct variants of cosmic inflation theories, but I can't seem to find the link right now.)

Just reading the papers references by the others in this thread and this link, it appears that inflation models where inflation starts and then shortly after stops, as opposed to "eternal" inflation models, don't necessarily produce a multiverse.

As one example, "hybrid inflation" is not "eternal inflation", so it doesn't necessarily produce a multiverse.
 
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