Nested universes across scales - existing literature?

[Mickey 6]

TL;DR

Has mainstream physics explored or dismissed the possibility of nested, heterogenous universes with fundamentally different physics, and where can I find this idea in academic literature? If the question is nonsense, what literature will help me understand why?

Thanks to those who responded to my introduction and pointed me to the forum rules and the article on personal theories. I think what I have is a literature question rather than theory promotion, but I understand my question is broadly speculative and I appreciate your patience.

I'm trying to understand whether a particular conceptual picture has been explored in mainstream physics, and if so, where to read about it.

The basic idea: Universes nested within each other across scales (what we call particles contain universes, what we call galaxies are particles in larger universes, and so on for a potentially infinite number of levels), where:

• Each scale level has genuinely different physical laws, not just different approximations
• The different laws at different scales might explain why QM and GR don't unify - they're accurate descriptions of different scale levels
• The nesting might form a closed loop (an ouroboros) rather than extending infinitely - our universe simultaneously contains and is contained by others in the hierarchy

I know this touches on:

• Black hole cosmology and baby universes
• Renormalization group flows
• Multiverse theories
• Maybe holographic principles?

What I want to know:

Has this specific combination - scale-demarcated nested universes with heterogeneous physics and potential closure - been explored as a framework? If so, what's it called and where can I read about it?


If not, is there a clear reason why this picture doesn't work or doesn't make sense that I should understand, and what literature should I read to understand why?

 

[Nugatory]

Has this specific combination - scale-demarcated nested universes with heterogeneous physics and potential closure - been explored as a framework?

No.

Your speculative idea neither explains some previously observed but unexplained phenomenon nor suggests some experiment/observation that might demonstrate an otherwise unexplainable result. Thus, as far as empirical science is concerned, there is nothing to explore here.

 

[jedishrfu]

Your idea of scale-based universes within universes, while a fun topic for science fiction stories, is not part of scientists' collective thinking today.

The novel Death's End by Cixin Liu, part of his Three-Body Problem trilogy, explores pocket universes where humanity retreats during a cosmic war.

---

Any new scientific theory must connect to reality by explaining phenomena or making testable predictions. It should be consistent, compatible with known results, and clearly stated for evaluation. Prefer simpler explanations unless complexity provides insight. Crucially, it should be testable and open to challenge, which makes it scientific rather than speculative.

---

This is a good time to kick back and read The Three-Body Problem trilogy while I close this thread.

Here's an Amazon link to the books:

https://www.amazon.com/Three-Body-Problem-Boxed-Set-Remembrance/dp/1250254493?tag=pfamazon01-20