What would the universe be like

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wonderer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores hypothetical models of the universe, focusing on concepts of energy, structure, and the nature of time. Participants propose various frameworks, including energy points, tiles, and their interactions, while questioning fundamental aspects of existence and reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests a universe composed of energy points that fade in and out of existence, with properties such as value, rate of change, and direction influencing interactions.
  • Another participant introduces a model of the universe as a matrix of tiles, influenced by string theory, where tiles compress and expand, creating the effect of time.
  • There is a discussion about how energy transfer occurs between tiles, with specific behaviors noted when tiles are compressed above or below certain thresholds.
  • Some participants question the implications of string theory and the nature of existence, including the origins of the universe and the concept of nothingness.
  • Frequency modulation is proposed as a potential factor in energy interactions across distances.
  • One participant describes the universe as a fixed structure of sphere-like tiles, comparing it to a pixelated screen, where each tile can represent a temperature within a defined range.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of competing views and models regarding the structure and behavior of the universe, with no consensus reached on any particular framework or explanation.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of interactions between energy points and tiles, highlighting the need for further exploration of their behaviors and the implications of their models. Some assumptions about energy and its properties remain unaddressed.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring theoretical physics, cosmology, and philosophical inquiries into the nature of existence and reality.

  • #61
DEQ: aka diffEQ = differential equations. I'm still reluctant to even attempt mapping 11 dimensional space-time to find the missing TOE. Crap, I'm still trying to figure out 4 dimensional space-time. Confusing. I can only see 4 dimensions, but, it takes 11 dimensions to explain them. I shudder to think how many dimensions it will take to explain the 'missing' 7 once they are found. Must be a string theory thing. The more you unravel it, the more you get strung on.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #62
Chronos said:
DEQ: aka diffEQ = differential equations. I'm still reluctant to even attempt mapping 11 dimensional space-time to find the missing TOE. Crap, I'm still trying to figure out 4 dimensional space-time. Confusing. I can only see 4 dimensions, but, it takes 11 dimensions to explain them. I shudder to think how many dimensions it will take to explain the 'missing' 7 once they are found. Must be a string theory thing. The more you unravel it, the more you get strung on.

Not so. The extra dimensions in string physics come from the need to describe the string consistently, not explaining lower dimensions. And they've had stable numbers for decades: 28 for bosonic strings, 10 for superstrings, 11 for M-theory. With clear, if technical, explanations of why they are different.
 
  • #63
connect said:
'Both in tandem' - are you referring to the fact our perceptions behaviour is similar to the behaviour of nature?

No.
Throw a ball.(direct)
Play music.(probagate)
Tape a walkman to the ball then throw it. The sound changes(both in tandem)

MATH
To do the math for each "whole" would include:
All the Space,All the Abilities(Vibrations for one) and All the time for that "whole" and each sub-level"whole" and each neighbor.

Else the math will never be right!
 
  • #64
ANOLOGY

Apply anology->->A TRAIN WHISTLE.

Apply anology to this framework.
Do the math.
 
  • #65
"resistance is futile"
 
  • #66
Ok, just in case the words "resistance is futile" was misunderstood. That was only meant to be funny...
 
  • #67
Is quantum mechanics more or less a way to avoid doing all the math beyond a certain precision?
 
  • #68
wonderer said:
Is quantum mechanics more or less a way to avoid doing all the math beyond a certain precision?


No, not at all. Perturbation theory could be described that way; express physics as an infinite series and only do the first n terms. But perturbation is a feature of work in classical physics too, for example celestial mechanics. If you mean uncertainty, that's not a cop-out, but a severe constraint, which has to be dealt with, and it does not prevent exact depictions in particlular cases. For example the photons in a laser beam all have the same frequency, hence momentum, to a high degree of exactitude. Uncertainty then says that we can know nothing about the position of any particular photon in the beam.

Beyond the simple cases the equations of quantum mechanics tend to become insoluble in exact terms. So approximations have to be used. This again is a common feature of all kinds of physics.
 
  • #69
Wouldn't it be possible to eliminate the uncertainty for the anything if it were passing through space(not just nothing) reacting with it as it goes. Even though there would be little happening, there would still be some interaction. And don't forget the cost of shipping and handling...
 
  • #70
Uncertainty in the universe, isn't necessarily something we need to get rid of, to explain the universe.

It might be the most fundamental thing in the universe. If we didn't have uncertainty we wouldn't have change.

Getting beyond it, to explain the origin of the universe, is another thing though.
 
  • #71
Getting beyond the point... it's really about the shape 'm', 'w' and '-'...
 
  • #72
'-' could not exist without 'm' and 'w'...
 
  • #73
I do appreciate your responses. It seems to me the answers went AROUND the question and didnt answer it...
Could anything be solved passing through space, not just nothing. With no approximations.

In this context NOTHING = LACK OF REACTION.
 
  • #74
Reflector said:
Getting beyond the point... it's really about the shape 'm', 'w' and '-'...

I'm stupid. What exactly is m,w and -. shape in your terms?
 
  • #75
wonderer said:
On a silver platter...right?

Picture this...remember the triangle for fire.
ABILITY
SPACE
TIME

TIME IS NOT AN ENTITY OR OBJECT.
Remove any one...the whole is no more...
 
  • #76
No, I can't say. I'm just having fun by putting simple childish things which represent my theory which (I think) explains a lot. If you choose to view them as childish then you are bypassing it... :smile:
 
  • #77
It's just a good way for Reflector to post his subliminal mysterious messages on the internet... That's how I view it. What else am I going to do? I'm just in my room trying to make a cool environment for my self, and I don't have any friends...
 
  • #78
Sorry, I got side-tracked. 'M' and 'W' are the same thing viewed from different points of view...
 
Last edited:
  • #79
Now that's a little more in the same ballpark.
 
  • #80
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0102/0102027.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0310/0310188.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0307/0307207.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0301/0301116.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #81
selfAdjoint said:
Not so. The extra dimensions in string physics come from the need to describe the string consistently, not explaining lower dimensions. And they've had stable numbers for decades: 28 for bosonic strings, 10 for superstrings, 11 for M-theory. With clear, if technical, explanations of why they are different.

Apologies. I can't resist poking fun at string theory. I will take it more seriously once a background independent version is proposed.
 
  • #82
It does seem that any theory that uses mulitples of the same thing (albeit in different configurations), in this case strings... AND without explaining the "space" in between them... is presumably flawed.

Some seem to forget that it's all about a "singularity."

I got a "hair" theory I'll sell ya... much smaller than strings.
 
  • #83
Maybe...just maybe you hit a direct bullseye...

A universe that should be something it...is not ...never was...and never will be.
 
  • #84
There is no true solidity in the universe... nor does it ever truly disappear.
 
  • #85
And I believe the reason for this is that it is continually attempting to achieve something it can never achieve...by design. A simple flaw.
 
  • #86
String theory is elegant and attractive. Unfortunately, it makes no testable predictions, to date. That is my main objection.
 
  • #87
wonderer said:
And I believe the reason for this is that it is continually attempting to achieve something it can never achieve...by design. A simple flaw.
It seems like it's comfortable in it's imperfection though. Maybe not so much a flaw but a limit.

Kind of like saying "it's a fun job, I can't be boss, but I can't be fired either."
 
Last edited:
  • #88
Guess it could even be expressed as a Lot like "tug of war"...the rope could be a string. I have only read a few lines about string theory and heard about the same.So if it doesn't fit...
 
Last edited:
  • #89
but If It Does...
 

Similar threads

High School Could Black Hole Collisions Trigger a Cyclical Big Bang and Universe Rebirth?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
High School What does it mean to say the Universe is the same everywhere?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Questions on the consequence of an evolving dark energy parameter
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Does a contracting universe destroy its black holes?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
High School What is the relationship between inflation and the expansion of our universe?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad What would a big crunch look like observationally?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Is the Universe's Expansion Misinterpreted Due to Curvature?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Does the expanding Universe follow Lorentz contraction?
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
Graduate Rate of expansion of the universe
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad Dark Energy as repulsive gravity
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K