189 replies to this topic

[amit nigam]

Our universe is so big and we haven't explored even a millionth of a millionth of .......... part of it. We have not gone anywhere outside our own solar system.
Yet some scientists, in which there is greatest among the greats Sir Einstien also, believe that there is more than one universe in which we can go by passing through a worm hole.
It is quite an intriguing topic and once you start studying about it you go more and more deep into it.The logic behind this is, "though there are mathematical models also but i m talking here in our day to day general language", that every particle has its antiparticle and extending that logicto universe scientists conclude that there must be an antiuniverse to every universe.
Some even suggest that to every universe there must be a universe in which similar kind of things must be happening but the direction of time must be reverse, that is my anti- in the universe which will be corresponding to our universe will be born old and die as a child.
Also about time travel it is written that if we travel around the event horizon of a blackhole we will reach back in time but not in this universe but our corresponding universe.
These things quite puzzle me very much. I m posting this so that i can have views and any interesting facts on this topic which is so exciting and mind-blowing.
Do write.

Bye Pals.

[Budmaster11]

If there was another universe it wouldn't be another one. It would have to be somehow conected to our universe somhow and then if it was it would be the same universe. It's kindof like sayong that inside your house and outside of it are two different sorlds.

[dodgerblue]

You should watch Donnie Darko. It deals with the concept of a Parallel or Tangent Universe.

[Sprnknwn]

I don´t think so. We still don´t know about the limits (if there are) of the universe we know. Maybe it´s infinite... we don´t know, so it´s a waste of time to think about others right now. For me, a universe is all that exists so there´s no reason why should be two... if there were, would be two parts of the same universe. It´s confusing but I guess you know what I mean.

[fortminorishot]

there could be, but hence the name there's only one... currently.

[matto]

amit nigam, on May 2 2006, 09:32 AM, said:

Our universe is so big and we haven't explored even a millionth of a millionth of .......... part of it. We have not gone anywhere outside our own solar system.
Yet some scientists, in which there is greatest among the greats Sir Einstien also, believe that there is more than one universe in which we can go by passing through a worm hole.

Firstly, I think the concept of worm holes were supposed to mean traveling from one place of the universe to another place, still in the same univese. And I don't think that Einstein, nor Hawking or anyone else, have ever specifically said that they think that there is more than one universe.

Actually, I think that there cannot be more than one universe simply because the definition of the word 'universe' doesn't allow it. The universe is specifically: Everything. There can't be two everythings! That's like saying that there is a 2*infinity amount of stars in the universe, it's the same as saying there's an infinity amount of stars in the universe. Here's the def'n:

Quote

All matter and energy, including the earth, the galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.

I don't think that that definition allows for there to be more than one universe, though I do think that the universe is so fricken huge that it may seem to be an infinite, or "double infinite," or even two universes into one, but in the end all of those boil down to the same thing...

[DogEater008]

lol. i'm guessing you're talking about parallel universes. The idea of multiple universes is not even a theory, it's just a myth. Only ideas that can be proven with evidence or to have a way to test it can be called a theory. Ideas that cannot be proven is not consisted as theory. Since you are talking about multiple universes, then i'm pretty sure you have at leasted heard of the string theory. The string theory isn't really a theory, since there are no way to prove it.

I don't exactly know what is the different between a wormhole and a black hole, other then that wormholes can be vary in sizes. People believe that black hole can be used for time travel. The reason why people think of it this way is that, the gravitational pull of the blackhole is so intense that lights cannot escape from it (therefore it is called a blackhole, since you cannot see it). Scientists treat time the same way as they treat waves. The stronger the gravity, the better it can bend and pull the wave. Imagine time being pull and bend, time would get longer which means to outsider observers ... you are SLOWING DOWN EXTREMELY, but to your observation, time travel normally. So if you were sucked in by a blackhole, people will see (if the light can escape from the gravity) that you have a slow and painfull death, but to you.. the instants that you were sucked in.. you were crumpled up into a tiny little dusts.

My point is, it might be possible to slow down or acclerate time, but you cannot go back/reverse into time. It just seem illogical.

It's pretty hard to imagine of a multiple unverises because as we know it, our universe is infinite. So the idea of multiple unverises is like 2 times infinity.

[dodgerblue]

Actually, if there were more than one, it wouldn't be called "universe" anymore because "uni" means only one.

Edit: Well, or even if there were more than one, like what matto said, it's counted as one combined, united, etc etc you get the picture. If you wanted to consider more than one "set" of planets, stars, moon, etc, you would have to redefine terms, words, entire discourses... entire subjects... Kind of pointless imho

Edited by dodgerblue, 03 May 2006 - 05:26 PM.

[Saint_Michael]

I have to agree We do not know what lies outside our solar system nor our universe.

Alot of theories have been discuss since man could think. But I do not think we have a border to the universe all together. It could be the cruelest thing that could happen that we the human species are the only ones in exsistence.

Or if their is another life form out there they know not to come here due to our evil intentions we display as a human species.

The closest to another universe would have to death. If a soul, superior being exsist then thats where it will be.

Also think about this our Sun is a ticking time bomb if our solar system is 13 billion years old are sun would be around that age as well. Most stars live what 20-30 billions years or a few hundred billion maybe. But what I'm getting at is that once Our sun blows you can kiss the first 3 planets good bye along with mars maybe if the blast radius gets that far.

Mankind is not even close to space travel, unlike the anime and tv shows we watch and books we read already has us there. But look at whats been happening in the last 2000 years give or take how you want to work what timeline in to that.

Also we are not protected from astroids or comets either it just take one giant size astroid to finish us and thats it. If a superior being exsist maybe it will prevent the destruction of mankind and actually show us what we need to do to actually survive when the days comes that our sun explodes.

But to answer some other of the posts, yes worm holes are only in theory since no one can prove they exsist, the closest you could think of a wormhole would be a black hole since no one really knows whats on the otherside as well.

I wouldn't mind space travel, going beyond the speed of light and travel billions and billions of miles to see if we are alone in this universe.

[amit nigam]

This is to all my dear friends who who have doubted the possibility of another universe, or time travel or wormholes.

Actually i m just an average guy like most of us and doing computer engineering. So i have not studied over these kind of theoritical concepts. so whatever i have written is not some kind of my own theory.

Those of you people who doubt the theory of space travel, like going into the past, and the theory of wormholes, I suggest them that they go through Sir Stephen Hawkings book, "A Brief History of Time".
I m giving you the address where you can find it. Just paste the given address to go through the amazing book,
http://www.physics.m...ry_in_Time.html

I m giving below some quotes from Sir Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" to prove that both einstien and hawking take these things as a possibility, and that too very seriously.

Quote

We now know that every particle has an antiparticle, with which it can annihilate. There could be whole antiworlds and antipeople made out of antiparticles. However, if you meet your antiself, don't shake hands! You would both vanish in a great flash of light.

Quote

According to this theory [strong anthropic principle], there are either many different universes or many different regions of a single universe, each with its own initial configuration and, perhaps, with its own set of laws of science. In most of these universes the conditions would not be right for the development of complicated organisms; only in the few universes that are like ours would intelligent beings develop and ask the question: "Why is the universe the way we see it?" The answer is then simple: If it had been different, we would not be here!

Quote

The idea of wormholes between different regions of space-time was not an invention of science fiction writers but came from a very respectable source.

In 1935, Einstein and Nathan Rosen wrote a paper in which they showed that general relativity allowed what they called “bridges,” but which are now known as wormholes. The Einstein-Rosen bridges didn’t last long enough for a spaceship to get through: the ship would run into a singularity as the wormhole pinched off. However, it has been suggested that it might be possible for an advanced civilization to keep a wormhole open.

Quote

We thus have experimental evidence both that space-time can be warped (from the bending of light during eclipses) and that it can be curved in the way necessary to allow time travel (from the Casimir effect). One might hope therefore that as we advance in science and technology, we would eventually manage to build a time machine. But if so, why hasn’t anyone come back from the future and told us how to do it? There might be good reasons why it would be unwise to give us the secret of time travel at our present primitive state of development, but unless human nature changes radically, it is difficult to believe that some visitor from the future wouldn’t spill the beans. Of course, some people would claim that sightings of UFOs are evidence that we are being visited either by aliens or by people from the future. (If the aliens were to get here in reasonable time, they would need faster-than-light travel, so the two possibilities may be equivalent.)

Quote

Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory.

I highly recommend all my pals to go through this book because it will change your whole perspective towards these kind of ultra - scientific things and its quite interesting too.

[Saint_Michael]

but again though not doubting the man with the highest IQ on the planet, but its all theory though. Yes they came up with the idea's and all but they have no proof. Even if you put the all the smartest people on earth and tell them to get a time machine working that they will succed. Time travel and worm holes are nothing more then sci-fi right now. Look at it now the richest nations of the world have yet to figure out how to space travel as common as driving a car. That is one future that could happen, but to many people are talking and not listening. We know how to do space flight we know how to make a space station and people living on it for long periods of time.

The process I see it we would have to make one space station every 50,000 miles to reach the moon and thus begin building a station on the moon. Once Successful it would be time to expand on the stations and reach mars. With all this nuclear technology I don't think it would be that hard to make a space shuttle go nuclear. We know nuclear power can last a very long time and can generate alot of power, look at all these nuke subs and battleships.

If everyone would stop fighting and pool in their resources this would be all possible, heck we would have already reach mars with all the money the world be spending in the last 6 years fighting wars and stuff.

If everyone would follow what japan did after WWII and go pacifist, heck I would see us at either jupiter or saturn working on the stations.

thats a future I wouldn't mind seeing but I doubt it will ever come though. All people care about is power and money and themselves anyone else is just a bug to them.

[amit nigam]

No my dear friend its not just all thoery.
It has been proved by many mathematical models even by those scientists who have not been able to take down there own mathematical finding.
Actually the only problem that we have in proving is our capacity, or better word will be incapacity, to build those kind of machines.

[shadowdemon]

Well first off, i would like to say that the thread has been from two+ univserses to wormholes and scientific theory.

The fact of the matter is that people have different opinions. Some people believe that the big bang theory started the universe and created the only universe. Some scientist believe that the pressure gasses and dust caused a massive explosion and they believed that started the only univerese.

Some people believe that the big bang caused our univerese and other bangs started others. And the only way to travel between universes is trough wormholes.

As for time traveling.-What does that have to do with double universe. Time travel isnt possible. If you think about it the only way to go back in time is with books. I suppose in the future scientist may figure a way to make mark points with computers then have them hooked up so that peoplego virtually back to the time moment. IT wouuld be impposible to go back in time because there i no way to send atoms back trough time

[Cerebral Stasis]

It all depends on what laws of physics you use. If one goes by Quantum Physics, then there is quite a bit of evidence that a multiverse does exist, maybe even that every choice that is made by every creature on earth (or random action by an object, for that matter) is different in another universe, making an infinate number of universes, each with something slightly different, such as what a certain person chose to do, who died, or even what time the universe exists in, but that is all just theory at the moment.

With building a space station every 50,000 miles, that would be inefficient, expensive, and unnecessary, not to mention improbable. A space station would have to orbit a larger body, or it would drift off. Between the Earth and the moon, gravity is so small that any space station would either fly out into space or be pulled toward one body or the other, eventually reaching speeds high enough to make the station too fast to be stopped before it would impact a body.

As for pooling of resources to reach Mars, the problem isn't just a lack of said resources, but also a lack of reason behind spending those resources. For example, WHY should we pool our resources and go to Mars? What purpose is there at the moment? True, there may be great scientific discoveries awaiting us, but what if there weren't? What if the whole Earth threw itself into a worldwide depression to get to Mars, only to drag their feet in the red dirt, unable to do anything more? This world is built, more or less, on Capitalism, and Capitalism requires a reason for everything. People don't just throw money in a pile for no reason. You may give a homeless person a dollar because you symapthise with him, but you probably wouldn't give money to people who wouldn't tell you what it was for, or if they told you that they were going to try to dig a hole to the center of the Earth. It's just not necessary.

Wormholes and black holes are still all theory. Neither has really been discovered, they are just assumed to exist.

The reason that people won't pool their money for the greater good is that humanity is, by nature, selfish, and until some society comes up with a way to completely rid themselves of that nature, we as a race will never achieve perfection (or the closest we can come to it). Would you do your job for no money, only for food, a house, and a vehicle? I know I would like some incentive - money - so that I can buy things I like and want. If you don't agree, then Communism is for you (seriously, that's how it works there).

[gaurdro]

By the definition posted by matto it is still possible for there to be another universe. it just takes one postulate to be feasible. that postulate would state:

There is an additional dimension to our reality beyond the three that we are free to see and move in.

This is already satisfied in our world to date. The fourth dimenson would be time or to go a little further and place the restraint that it had to be another space dimension things will still work out because we would not be able to see or move freely in this fourth dimension. Just move a slight distance along that fourth dimension axis and you are in another three dimensional space and thus another universe although it may be completely empty or infinitely small.

since this can be hard to see for four dimensions so i'll give another example in three dimension but it'll involve a move to flatland. let's imagine that we live in 2 dimensions, our flat-universe. then let's place a line perpendicular to the plane at a given point. if you move any amount in the third dimension the point is not in the plane of the universe but there is still a plane there thus there would have to be another flat-universe.

[Blue Lightning]

We don't know enough about the universe to make any predictions right now. But I still do belive that there will be more than one universe when we FINALY have the technology required to explore our universe and anything else out there.

[matto]

amit nigam, on May 4 2006, 01:15 PM, said:

No my dear friend its not just all thoery.
It has been proved by many mathematical models even by those scientists who have not been able to take down there own mathematical finding.
Actually the only problem that we have in proving is our capacity, or better word will be incapacity, to build those kind of machines.

No. It has been proven that if either quantom mechanics or the theory of relativity is completely true, then it is possible that what we are talking about may be true. It simply proves that at this point it shouldn't be regarded as impossible, not that it is 100% possible and probable.

gaurdro, on May 5 2006, 09:53 AM, said:

By the definition posted by matto it is still possible for there to be another universe. it just takes one postulate to be feasible. that postulate would state:

There is an additional dimension to our reality beyond the three that we are free to see and move in.

This is already satisfied in our world to date. The fourth dimenson would be time or to go a little further and place the restraint that it had to be another space dimension things will still work out because we would not be able to see or move freely in this fourth dimension. Just move a slight distance along that fourth dimension axis and you are in another three dimensional space and thus another universe although it may be completely empty or infinitely small.

since this can be hard to see for four dimensions so i'll give another example in three dimension but it'll involve a move to flatland. let's imagine that we live in 2 dimensions, our flat-universe. then let's place a line perpendicular to the plane at a given point. if you move any amount in the third dimension the point is not in the plane of the universe but there is still a plane there thus there would have to be another flat-universe.

While that is true, we only know of ways to slow down and travel through the fourth dimension in a forward manner, not stop it nor go backwards in it. So, I guess by your post (unless I am not understanding it properly) there are infinitely many universes, one is created and destroyed every infinitely small amount of time that passes. So, even if that is true, we are still only able to be in one universe that constantly is destroyed and recreated over and over again...

Which is really the same as saying that there is only one universe. =P

[Cerebral Stasis]

There is no real proof that supports the concept of time being a dimension, like a line constantly being drawn that one can backtrack on. Time is simply a matter of perception. For example, if the human brain worked twice as fast, time would also seem to go twice as fast, so the day would seem to last 48 hours instead of 24, but the actual number would never really change..

[amit nigam]

No, thats not true.
Time has been proved to be a dimension beyond doubt. Infact what scientists are right not working on is to bend this time axis in ways which are beyond the level of most of us here, atleast mine.
But i know this much that like gravitation bends the space time curve in the same way they are trying to bend the space time , and if they are able to bend it 180 degrees then maybe in future the concept of travelling faster than light will not remain upto the sci - fi flicks only.

[gaurdro]

matto, on May 6 2006, 01:50 PM, said:

While that is true, we only know of ways to slow down and travel through the fourth dimension in a forward manner, not stop it nor go backwards in it. So, I guess by your post (unless I am not understanding it properly) there are infinitely many universes, one is created and destroyed every infinitely small amount of time that passes. So, even if that is true, we are still only able to be in one universe that constantly is destroyed and recreated over and over again...

Which is really the same as saying that there is only one universe. =P

The other Universe's aren't being created and destroyed. they all exist simultaneously although they are out of our reach and unconnected to the present universe that we see around us. in the 2-d example the other planes still exist just they aren't visible to someone in one of the 2-d universe.

by the way another possible 4th dimension(and possibly fifth) would be probability which is possibly a little easier to visualize. each minute movement along that axis would produce a slightly different universe along side our's where things haven't turned out exactly the same.

[matto]

Cerebral Stasis, on May 6 2006, 07:59 PM, said:

There is no real proof that supports the concept of time being a dimension, like a line constantly being drawn that one can backtrack on. Time is simply a matter of perception. For example, if the human brain worked twice as fast, time would also seem to go twice as fast, so the day would seem to last 48 hours instead of 24, but the actual number would never really change..

Firstly, time has been proven to be a dimension. Secondly, if you were to experience time 2x faster, then the day would be 12 hours, not 48.

gaurdro, on May 8 2006, 09:57 AM, said:

The other Universe's aren't being created and destroyed. they all exist simultaneously although they are out of our reach and unconnected to the present universe that we see around us. in the 2-d example the other planes still exist just they aren't visible to someone in one of the 2-d universe.

by the way another possible 4th dimension(and possibly fifth) would be probability which is possibly a little easier to visualize. each minute movement along that axis would produce a slightly different universe along side our's where things haven't turned out exactly the same.

That is the same as saying that the past is existing at the same time as the present, AND at the same time as the future. THere is a possibility of more than one universe existing on the axis of the fourth dimension, but it won't work since there cannot exist two places in time at once.

Actually... maybe there can be, like the whole theory of time slowing down in a black hole. But that isn't in a different universe, as we can still get radiation and stuff out of black holes, and thus signals from astronaughts fallen into the blackhole, as Stephen Hawking used as an exapmle in "A Breif History of Time". It would still be the same universe, and thus it is impossible for there to be more than one universe.

edit:
No but seriously, you've got me thinking about this now. I'm thinking there can be more than one universe, but only one can exist at a TIME. No, but it's the same universe. That's like saying that yesterday we were in a different universe than the universe we are in right NOW. And when I typed NOW, I was in a different universe than I am in NOW. So it's really still 1 universe that is "refreshing" constantly.

Edited by matto, 09 May 2006 - 03:49 AM.

[amit nigam]

hi all

actually Mr. Matto has confused me also.

these are some quotes from his last mail.

Quote

That is the same as saying that the past is existing at the same time as the present, AND at the same time as the future. THere is a possibility of more than one universe existing on the axis of the fourth dimension, but it won't work since there cannot exist two places in time at once.

Quote

No but seriously, you've got me thinking about this now. I'm thinking there can be more than one universe, but only one can exist at a TIME. No, but it's the same universe. That's like saying that yesterday we were in a different universe than the universe we are in right NOW. And when I typed NOW, I was in a different universe than I am in NOW. So it's really still 1 universe that is "refreshing" constantly.

i would like to see some more kinda explanation over this from him otherwise i will lose enough of my mind understanding this.

[matto]

Yeah, I've kind of confused myself

But I'll try to explain:
here is the secibd message I replied to, when things started getting confusing:

Quote

By the definition posted by matto it is still possible for there to be another universe. it just takes one postulate to be feasible. that postulate would state:

There is an additional dimension to our reality beyond the three that we are free to see and move in.

This is already satisfied in our world to date. The fourth dimenson would be time or to go a little further and place the restraint that it had to be another space dimension things will still work out because we would not be able to see or move freely in this fourth dimension. Just move a slight distance along that fourth dimension axis and you are in another three dimensional space and thus another universe although it may be completely empty or infinitely small.

since this can be hard to see for four dimensions so i'll give another example in three dimension but it'll involve a move to flatland. let's imagine that we live in 2 dimensions, our flat-universe. then let's place a line perpendicular to the plane at a given point. if you move any amount in the third dimension the point is not in the plane of the universe but there is still a plane there thus there would have to be another flat-universe.

His idea states that if we were able to move along the 4th dimension axis (time), then we would be in a different universe. This is feasable. But it is not possible for anything to travel back or forward in time. If any particle or atom was able to go foward or backwards in time, then another universe would exist, but since that is not true, then no it cannot work.
The whole idea of a black hole slowing down time does not make a new universe, nor a wormhole into a new universe (though possibly a wormhole into another place in the SAME universe). The fact that time slows down does not make it go forward nor backwards in time, so it is still in the same universe.

This:

Quote

There is an additional dimension to our reality beyond the three that we are free to see and move in.

is still true. We are unable to see nor move our position in time. That "postulate" does not in an y way make there a universe outside of our own. Nor does it counter the fact that the universe means "everything," and there can't be another universe because the matter in that universe will be included under "everything," making it part of our universe anyway.


That wasn't very organized, I was sort of regurgitating my thoughts into the post. Ask questions, and I'll give answers =D

[leeleelee]

“For thousands of years, people have wondered about the universe. Did it stretch out forever or was there a limit? And where did it all come from? Did the universe have a beginning, a moment of creation? Or had the universe existed forever? The debate between these two views raged for centuries without reaching any conclusions. Personally, I’m sure that the universe began with a hot Big Bang. But will it go on forever? If not, how will it end? I’m much less certain about that. The expansion of the universe spreads everything out, but gravity tries to pull it all back together again. Our destiny depends on which force will win.” —STEPHEN HAWKING

[matto]

leeleelee, on May 10 2006, 07:45 PM, said:

“For thousands of years, people have wondered about the universe. Did it stretch out forever or was there a limit? And where did it all come from? Did the universe have a beginning, a moment of creation? Or had the universe existed forever? The debate between these two views raged for centuries without reaching any conclusions. Personally, I’m sure that the universe began with a hot Big Bang. But will it go on forever? If not, how will it end? I’m much less certain about that. The expansion of the universe spreads everything out, but gravity tries to pull it all back together again. Our destiny depends on which force will win.” —STEPHEN HAWKING

That's kind of off topic... why'd you post it? Did you have any conclusions you'd like to make about it or what you think its relevance is to there being more than one universe or not?