- #1

hammock

- 20

- 0

I've just watched the lecture of Penrose on his cyclic universe theory here:

I fact I understood that he claims that any kind of matter dissapears in a couple of Googol years due to Hawking radition; so there is no matter left at the end, which leads to a reduced degree of freedom in terms of the 2nd law of thermodynamics which then "re-initializes" space (or so ... my term) and leads to another big bang.

What I do not understand is why he claims his aeons being sequential. In fact, time somehow is a product of mass movement in space and if there is no mass, there is no time.

So then, why can't these aeons exist parallel to ours?

I fact I understood that he claims that any kind of matter dissapears in a couple of Googol years due to Hawking radition; so there is no matter left at the end, which leads to a reduced degree of freedom in terms of the 2nd law of thermodynamics which then "re-initializes" space (or so ... my term) and leads to another big bang.

What I do not understand is why he claims his aeons being sequential. In fact, time somehow is a product of mass movement in space and if there is no mass, there is no time.

So then, why can't these aeons exist parallel to ours?

Last edited: