A relatively simple insight into a possible idea for the shape and size of the universe. If the visible universe originates from a much larger universe and budded off from this at the quantum scale 14.6 billion years ago (or therabouts) and inflated to about the size of a softball (see figure 1) then it may be possible that the universe as seen from outside could still be that size. There are a couple of reasons for this.
Figure 1: Size of universe at end of inflation (from 'Cosmos', Astronomy collectors edition, 2006)
Firstly, it is highly likely that the universe beyond the visible horizon is fractal in extent. This is an extrapolation from the observation that our observable universe is fractal on large scales. From observing nature it is apparent that there are many examples such as the lungs, brain and trees that maximise surface area within a small volume. In a perfect system an infinite area could be held within a finite volume. So would it not be possible for a near infinite volume to be held within a small hyper-'volume'?
Figure 1: Size of universe at end of inflation (from 'Cosmos', Astronomy collectors edition, 2006)
Firstly, it is highly likely that the universe beyond the visible horizon is fractal in extent. This is an extrapolation from the observation that our observable universe is fractal on large scales. From observing nature it is apparent that there are many examples such as the lungs, brain and trees that maximise surface area within a small volume. In a perfect system an infinite area could be held within a finite volume. So would it not be possible for a near infinite volume to be held within a small hyper-'volume'?
Secondly, to conserve available space and energy only the 3 dimensions of space and 1 of time needed for the universe to function are included in the visible universe. This has been true since our universe may have 'budded' from a larger hyper-universe (or multiverse, also known as the whole universe) and attained a separate causality (see figure 2). However, there are many other dimensions that are curled up remnants from the period of inflation. These may have been active until inflation ended and exist as other dimensional possibilities outside the observable universe (as a false vaccum). From outside, this budded (or pocket) universe would appear either frozen at its size at the end of inflation (but evolving inside) or disappear altogether (due to the transition to a real vacuum state). If the first case is true that an entity outside of the universe may influence it, and if the second case is true then it would be unreachable by physical methods and as isolated as we observe it.
Figure 2: Universes within universes (from 'Introducing Fractal Geometry', Lesmoir-Gordon et al, 2004)
There is much speculation about the shape of the universe. This is both the shape of the visible universe that we live in and of the complete universe of all existence. Since nature is lazy (many examples - blowing bubbles collapse to spherical shape, emergent systems from simple rules) it would be reasonable to expect the universe to be of a 'spherical' topology. That is, hyperspherical with 4 dimensions (3 space, 1 time) for the pocket universe we live in. This does depend on whether time can be treated as an equivalent dimension to space (this is likely). If our universe is not of this shape but any other such as the shape of a football then this would indicate that we are in a constructed universe rather than a totally natural one. In fact our universe could be in a lab watched by hyper-dimensional beings or an ornament (very unlikely but possible).
Regarding the nature and shape of the whole universe there are many theories ranging from perpetual creation of pocket universes from a false vacuum to creation by divine intervention. Yet, I think that the most likely is one that obeys quantum theory. Every decision, change in atomic spin, or flap of the wing of a butterfly could generate another pocket universe budding from the quantum potential of the flase vacuum. This does not mean that these do exist but that the information is there to create these new spaces if they are needed (by observation from future human or alien entity). Would nature be so lazy as to create our universe only because we are her to observe it? Maybe.
If we are alone in the universe then everything is natural. If we are not alone then things could have happened countless times before and will again. We may be by experiment but then isn't nature an experiment in herself? One point to consider here. Our theries become more and more elaborate as we find out more about life, the universe and everything but things appear to operate according to our latest fad or belief. This would apply to the computer program as much as the existence of God. Yet how would the false vacuum exist in the first place?
If we are alone in the universe then everything is natural. If we are not alone then things could have happened countless times before and will again. We may be by experiment but then isn't nature an experiment in herself? One point to consider here. Our theries become more and more elaborate as we find out more about life, the universe and everything but things appear to operate according to our latest fad or belief. This would apply to the computer program as much as the existence of God. Yet how would the false vacuum exist in the first place?
No comments:
Post a Comment