[Nuke]

interesting idea and the article was a far better read than this thread has been. now would these black holes need to suck up a whole universe worth of material to create a new universe? or would that mean that the mass of new universes will always be smaller than the universes which came before? the former would mean that there would not be a whole lot of loss, but in the latter it seems like we would reach a point where there is not enough material in one universe to facilitate the creation of the next, causing the multiverse (for lack of a better word) to eventually fail epically. then what happens to the mother universe when the new universe is created? would it just puff out or crunch down or just turn into a soup of background radiation.

[IronBeer]

If for nothing else, a non-arbitrary explanation of inflation makes this new theory valuable. Einstein's cosmological constant may not have been so wrong after all.

I was about to ask the question "hurr, where does the mass for a new universe come from?" But upon closer reading, and the fact that matter and energy seem interchangeable somewhat (please set me straight if I'm mistaken about mass-energy ...equivalence), I'd just sound stupid asking that question now.

And, if I'm not mistaken, this torsion concept could be an explanation for zero-point energy?

Very fascinating idea, but it raises the question of "Where does our universe exist? Are WE within a black hole? Where does the recursion end? Where did all the mass/energy that comprises existence stem from originally?"

[Nuke]

I was about to ask the question "hurr, where does the mass for a new universe come from?" But upon closer reading, and the fact that matter and energy seem interchangeable somewhat (please set me straight if I'm mistaken about mass-energy ...equivalence), I'd just sound stupid asking that question now.

e=mc^2?

Very fascinating idea, but it raises the question of "Where does our universe exist? Are WE within a black hole? Where does the recursion end? Where did all the mass/energy that comprises existence stem from originally?"

1. where seems like a universal property, it has no place in the multiverse
2. i doubt were in a black hole. the theory seemed to mention that a certain level of torsion had to be met before a universe would form.
3. the recursion most likely ends when the proper level of torsion can no longer be facilitated.
4. the mother universe.

[Nuclear1]

Derp.

NO BAD AARDWOLF

punishment happes nao

[Aardwolf]

Is it recursion, or iteration?

[General Battuta]

interesting idea and the article was a far better read than this thread has been. now would these black holes need to suck up a whole universe worth of material to create a new universe? or would that mean that the mass of new universes will always be smaller than the universes which came before? the former would mean that there would not be a whole lot of loss, but in the latter it seems like we would reach a point where there is not enough material in one universe to facilitate the creation of the next, causing the multiverse (for lack of a better word) to eventually fail epically. then what happens to the mother universe when the new universe is created? would it just puff out or crunch down or just turn into a soup of background radiation.

I believe there's something akin to zero point energy going on here.

[Klaustrophobia]

why can't we ever just admit we have NO ****ING CLUE how the universe started and will never know. 

[General Battuta]

why can't we ever just admit we have NO ****ING CLUE how the universe started and will never know.  

Because it's wrong?

We can trace the development of the universe with pinpoint accuracy back to earlier than .0000001 seconds after the initial singularity. And the only reason that singularity exists is because of the current incompatibility between GR and QM.

This theory would eradicate that incompatibility.

[Nuke]

this is usually the stage where you hand ovet the formulas to the particle accelerator crews to see if they can find proof that it isnt false.

[General Battuta]

Quite so.

[StarSlayer]

Ignorant person questions inbound!

Does this mean that our universe completely exists within the center of another universe's black hole (like a compressed file) or that or universe basically is the material ejected out the end of another universe's blackhole?

While this does seem like it could answer the question of how our universe began it still doesn't really solve the issue of where/when/how "existence" started, correct?  Since it seems we could be the universe of a universe of a universe times n, yes no?

[Mongoose]

The whole concept of recursive black holes generating universe inflation and linear time seems rather fundamentally absurd and contrived...but then again, quantum mechanics itself is bat**** insane, so what do I know?

[General Battuta]

Ignorant person questions inbound!

Does this mean that our universe completely exists within the center of another universe's black hole (like a compressed file) or that or universe basically is the material ejected out the end of another universe's blackhole?

The former. Mathematically you can treat it as a hologram emerging from information encoded on the 'surface' of the black hole, the event horizon. The whole universe can be described this way and it's actually very mathematically powerful.

While this does seem like it could answer the question of how our universe began it still doesn't really solve the issue of where/when/how "existence" started, correct?  Since it seems we could be the universe of a universe of a universe times n, yes no?

Well, part of the problem is that conditions on the 'outside' could be very different, and we couldn't necessarily retrieve information on those conditions, so it's hard to say.

The whole concept of recursive black holes generating universe inflation and linear time seems rather fundamentally absurd and contrived...but then again, quantum mechanics itself is bat**** insane, so what do I know?

The math is what tells, and if the math works out and is experimentally validated...

If there's a single 'original universe' that contains black holes, which contain universes, which contain black holes, then odds are we're in one of the child universes, not the original.

[Mongoose]

I never did very well with the mathematical side of my physics degree.  Unfortunately, that side comprised the vast majority of my physics degree.

And I do think that StarSlayer raises a valid point.  Even if, as you say, there's some sort of single "original universe" that spawned all of the child universes, that still leaves us struggling to describe the origins of that original universe.  We'd certainly gain a much greater perspective on our own universe if something like this could be experimentally borne out, but in the end, we'd sort of have the same questions as before.

[General Battuta]

I never did very well with the mathematical side of my physics degree.  Unfortunately, that side comprised the vast majority of my physics degree.

And I do think that StarSlayer raises a valid point.  Even if, as you say, there's some sort of single "original universe" that spawned all of the child universes, that still leaves us struggling to describe the origins of that original universe.  We'd certainly gain a much greater perspective on our own universe if something like this could be experimentally borne out, but in the end, we'd sort of have the same questions as before.

Possibly, but science answers the questions it can answer to prepare the for the questions it can't yet.

There's always the possibility that the information we need is lost beyond an event horizon, of course.

[swashmebuckle]

IU: best music school in the country AND explained the universe.  Kudos!

[StarSlayer]

I must admit, I can look up at a sky full of stars on a clear night away from the city and feel insignificant, especially compounded with the fact that I'm seeing only a small portion of the galaxy which is one of many in the universe...   


...And this postulates the universe is basically a tiny zip file in another universe's flash drive.

For all Sovereign's big talk this kinda makes the Reapers pretty insignificant

[Kosh]

And I do think that StarSlayer raises a valid point.  Even if, as you say, there's some sort of single "original universe" that spawned all of the child universes, that still leaves us struggling to describe the origins of that original universe.  We'd certainly gain a much greater perspective on our own universe if something like this could be experimentally borne out, but in the end, we'd sort of have the same questions as before.

Assuming the theory will be proven, while it would not explain the origin of the parent universe it would still explain the origins of our universe, which is more than we know now. It's still a big step forward, pushing back the boundries of the unknown that much more.

[Flipside]

Thing is, in physics, it's possible that the parent could be somewhere within a child, we think linearly, thanks to the arrow of time, and the very words used can be confusing, but for all we know, the Universe that we spawned from may not even have been created yet. Cause and Effect doesn't apply if Time is all over the place. This universe could as much be an echo backwards as an echo forwards.

Kind of like the Asimov story, The Last Question, where mankind turns out, at the end of the Universe, to be 'God' by starting a new one.

[redsniper]

Thing is, in physics, it's possible that the parent could be somewhere within a child