The Universe: 4 Forces Constant Forever?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the universe, particularly the fundamental forces and the possibility of unknown energies or phenomena that could influence these forces. Participants explore concepts related to cosmology, the limits of current scientific understanding, and the implications of an infinite universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a belief in a single, infinite universe governed by fundamental forces, questioning whether these forces might not apply universally.
  • Another participant mentions dark energy and dark matter as indicators of potential gaps in our understanding of gravity, suggesting that current models may not be universally valid.
  • A different viewpoint discusses the inflationary model of the universe, proposing that the forces may not have created the universe but emerged from a primordial state.
  • Some participants challenge the assertion that we know "0%" of the universe, arguing that we have substantial theories explaining many observations, although they acknowledge the lack of a complete theory of everything.
  • Concerns are raised about the optimism of claiming we know "95%" of the universe, with references to historical instances where scientific understanding was later proven inadequate.
  • There is a suggestion that while we may have a robust understanding within our current paradigms, the potential for new theories exists, and the path to discovering them may involve discarding less viable ideas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion features multiple competing views regarding the extent of our knowledge about the universe and the nature of fundamental forces. There is no consensus on the percentage of knowledge we possess or the implications of an infinite universe.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of current theories and the unresolved nature of certain phenomena, such as the conditions of the early universe and the understanding of mass. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainties in cosmology and theoretical physics.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring cosmology, theoretical physics, and the philosophy of science, particularly regarding the limits of human knowledge and the evolution of scientific theories.

Winnipeg
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Well to start things off, this is my first post. =)
I'm not sure which category to post thi under, but I figured this would be appropriate.
I am a big fan of Stephen Hawking and have read all of his books multiple times, and I was wondering a couple things that maybe you smart people out there have an answer too. (Im 17 and other than loving Quantum Phsics, I am a n00b.)

Okay, so. First off, I personally believe in our universe is the single and only universe, and it itself is infinite in size. Now obviously our universe is goverened by the Fundamental forces, and pretty much created by them too, but I was wondering if maybe this is not as true as we think. (Crazy, i know, don't kill me.)

We literally know 0% of everything we can know about the universe, and maybe somewhere way down the road, (like waaaay far away, Let's say an unfathemale amount of light years) there could be a place where some sort of strange energy, let's say Pink Energy, could somehow counter act upon the fundamental forces, and the fundamental forces in fact only governed our small corner of the universe?

Is this possible?
Is this stupid?
Is there any information you can give me as to why/why not this is possible?

I have never been able to fnd anything about this, so thanks for reading and responding!
 
Space news on Phys.org
Well, dark energy and dark matter seems to be pretty weird...that could potentially be an indication of something wrong with our understanding of gravity, although it's far too early to know for certain. The pioneer anomaly also sheds some (very very very small amount of) doubt as to whether we have the right formulas.

We definitely don't know everything about everything. We don't have a theory of everything just yet.

But, I mean, until we can come up with something better, we might as well use what we got (unless what we got is proven wrong...in which case we can only use what we got for specific cases).

This has been the path of science for a long time. We have a model, and it's only valid over some range of speeds or sizes or w/e, and then we get better models that are valid over larger ranges of speeds and energies. So far, we don't have a theory that's valid for all ranges of sizes/speeds/energies.
 
@Winnipeg: The universe as it's commonly understood, is believed to have "inflated" like a balloon from something like a pinprick. If so, then the forces didn't create them, and in fact at that time there would only be 3 forces anyway: Strong Nuclear, Gravity, and the ElectroWeak force which would later separate into the E&M and the Weak Nuclear Force.

The whole reason this would be possible isn't that a big bang "ejected" or "exploded" and the shrapenel = the universe. Think instead of a balloon with the stars and galaxies painted on it when it's half-inflated. Let the air out, blow some in, inflate it MORE than you did. That's the model of 3+1 spacetime *somehow* emerging from a primordial vacuum, or the collision of Branes or some other exotic meta-cosmology.

Then again... in an infinite universe, none of that holds or makes any sense, unless beyond the CMB there is just... more universe. That's a bit of the problem with an infinite truly UNIverse... you can make the very sane, not stupid, not crazy argument that far away in spacetime, beyond the horizon coudl be... anything. More of us, but walking on our hands. Anything. That's infinity for you.

Nothing you've said is stupid or crazy however, and you've been very honest about your experience. This is a forum that is all about education, so ask away. That said, if you don't mind I'd like to ask something; why do you believe the universe is "infinite in size" and the only one? It's definitely not something most people believe so strongly. Ah, and an infinite universe without boundaries is probably what you're really saying, whereas "infinite in size" could be followed by, "but totally empty!". :wink:
 
Last edited:
"We literally know 0% of everything we can know about the universe"

I think it is more accurate to say that we know perhaps 95% of everything we can know about the universe. We have theory that explains almost everything that we observe, our new evidence shows a strong tendency towards convergence (e.g. evidence regarding the age of the universe), and there is only only so much that we can even in theory observe about the universe.

We don't have a complete theory of everything, but most current research is devoted to theories that would deviate from current theories only in subtle ways in extraordinary situations.
 
Estimating a percentage of "what we know" is silly, not to mention functionally, literally, and semantically WRONG.
 
Might I also point out that there were many times in history when people thought they "knew basically all there is to know". Before the advent of QM, people though that with classical mechanics almost everything was done. Then QM came along and wrecked that ship. When Dirac formulated his formula for electrons, someone real famous (who exactly escapes me atm) stated that within a couple of years everything would be known (he thought that there was just 1 more equation involving the nucleus to be solved). He was proven wrong too.

I wouldn't get too optimistic that we "know almost everything" - as is suggested by the 95% figure you posted.
 
Matterwave said:
Might I also point out that there were many times in history when people thought they "knew basically all there is to know". Before the advent of QM, people though that with classical mechanics almost everything was done. Then QM came along and wrecked that ship. When Dirac formulated his formula for electrons, someone real famous (who exactly escapes me atm) stated that within a couple of years everything would be known (he thought that there was just 1 more equation involving the nucleus to be solved). He was proven wrong too.

I wouldn't get too optimistic that we "know almost everything" - as is suggested by the 95% figure you posted.

Very true... not to be pessemistic, but given that at least the first ~360,000 years and everything at and below the Planck scale (not to mention the contents of the supermassive BHs that drive galaxies and Quasars!) is a mystery... and the first is likely to remain so FOREVER in terms of direct observation...

95% is... hell, we don't even understand mass :smile:
 
We probably know almost everything possible to know in our present paradigm of theory. I doubt that knowledge is complete. I'm confident better theories are 'out there', but, think the only way to discover them is to eliminate pretenders. Not an easy task. When we achieve the next level I'm confident we will all be slapping our heads.
 
Chronos said:
We probably know almost everything possible to know in our present paradigm of theory. I doubt that knowledge is complete. I'm confident better theories are 'out there', but, think the only way to discover them is to eliminate pretenders. Not an easy task. When we achieve the next level I'm confident we will all be slapping our heads.

We're not supposed to be slapping our head NOW?! I have these bruises for nothing, bugger! :wink:
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Bubble universes and physical constants
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad Questions on the consequence of an evolving dark energy parameter
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
High School Can the force of gravity overcome the Planck force?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Graduate Can there be a lawless universe (according to Hawking)?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School How did the universe start and evolve into what it is today?
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Undergrad Constant Curvature and about its meaning
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Did Universal Physical Constants Exist at the Big Bang?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Black Hole to Other Universe: Violation of 1st Law?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad What if the Universe expands faster than the speed of light?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Undergrad Brian Cox and the end of the Universe?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K