Is the Universe's Oscillating Theory Inefficient?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert J. Grave
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Oscillation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the oscillating universe theory and its perceived inefficiency, particularly in relation to cosmological principles and conservation laws. Participants explore the reasons behind the rejection of this theory, including thermodynamic implications and observational evidence regarding the universe's geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why cosmologists describe the universe as "inefficient" and seek clarification on the basis for this claim.
  • One participant lists three main concerns regarding the oscillating universe theory: it allegedly violates the second law of thermodynamics, current observations suggest the universe is flat rather than closed, and the energy from a collapse cannot be efficiently converted into the subsequent expansion.
  • Another participant proposes that the oscillating universe could be efficient and shares a paper summarizing their findings, inviting feedback on their ideas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the efficiency of the oscillating universe theory, with some questioning the mainstream scientific stance while others propose alternative perspectives. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the efficiency of the universe and the validity of the concerns raised.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of a clear source for the claim of inefficiency and highlight the dependence on definitions of efficiency and conservation laws. The discussion also reflects uncertainty regarding the implications of current cosmological observations.

Robert J. Grave
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
The oscillation of the universe therory was dropped because 'the universe is very inefficient' and so could not rebound after a collapse. What is the reason that cosmologist say this? In what way is it inefficient? It seems that the conservation laws say the opposite. Robert.
 
Space news on Phys.org
Robert J. Grave said:
The oscillation of the universe therory was dropped because 'the universe is very inefficient' and so could not rebound after a collapse. What is the reason that cosmologist say this? In what way is it inefficient? It seems that the conservation laws say the opposite. Robert.

Could you provide a little more context please? Which "oscillation theory" are you referring to? Who said that the universe is inefficient?
 
The inefficiant universe

I can not find the net source of the statement that 'the universe is inefficiant'. The source sited 3 things that were as problem with the therory of an oscillating universe. 1. it violated the 2nd law of thermo dynamics. 2. the latest observations indicate the universe is flat not closed, a requirement for the universe to collapse, a lack of sufficent mass. 3. the universe is very inefficent and the energy of collapse could not be efficiently converted to the next expansion resulting in imediate recollapse.
My question is: why is the universe inefficent, given the fact that mass/energy, momentum, is preserved? if momentum is preserved then the momentum of the collapse must be conserved and result in another expansion.
That is what I do not understand. These 3 concerns are aparently the ideas of main stream science. Thanks for your responce. Robert.
 
The oscillating universe could be very efficient. I was thinking about this question during a few last months and have summarised my results in a short paper. If you are interested you can find it in the physics arxiv:

http://uk.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0702113

Since this is the first draft, I would appreciate any comments.
 

Similar threads

High School Conflict between the conservation of matter and the rapid expansion of our universe
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
High School History of Cosmology: 1915-1929 | Einstein, Hubble & GR
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Undergrad Why is the observed local region of space flat?
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
Undergrad Why didn't the Big Bang form a Black Hole?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Graduate Experimental test of shrinking matter theory?
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
High School Estimates — True Size of the Universe?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
Graduate Total mass and/or future of dark energy = cyclic universe?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Undergrad Using GR to predict the shape of the entire universe?
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
High School Does Roger Penrose's Big Bang cyclic-universe thing make sense?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
High School What does it mean to say the Universe is the same everywhere?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K