Physics in Different Universes?

I was just curious has anyone been able to develop a model of what an entirely different universe might be like and what were the weird results? I'm just wondering because I know they can create models of this one so figured they might have somehow developed a model for one that is entirely different.

Do you believe in dimensions?

Do you believe in hyperdimensional physics?

Do you believe in alternate universes?

Do you believe in infinite universes?

Do you believe in time travel?

Do you believe in psychics?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do you believe in life after love?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You live in a "alternate" universe so tell us what its like.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

darksidZz,
People believe in the toothfaery, santa claus, chupacabra's, ghosts, god, free energy, perpetual motion, etc The list of "belief's" are extensive and they do not need any merit since it doesn't require any scientific facts.

What you should really be asking for is to examine is "if any of these current hypothetical theories have actual been substantiated as scientific facts".

For instance:
Dimensions are a fact, Science and Mathematics has used Dimensions for years.

Hyperdimensions are a fiction based upon the term not being used conventionally in physics but in various fictional formats (feel free to find a scientific paper written on the subject to prove the hypothesis wrong), But Hypercubes are a Mathematical fact.

Alternate universes are currently borderline Fringe (the Sci-fi side) and the brainfood for Science Fiction. The current argument that can be made is: "If infinite universes exist and these universes are alternative, they will be completely intangible from one another because of their differences." (It's posed to identify multiple universes would require bridging the universes through a super-symmetry method "where all universes are the same to begin with". This makes the bridging tangible since you already know the positions for each side of the bridge.)

Infinite Universes are currently borderline Fringe (the Sci-fi side) and the brainfood for Science Fiction, however this doesn't rule out the possibility of it being a fact. It should however be considered that "All universes come from the same Radix point, the same beginning" otherwise it undermines the capacity for them to exist. After all to connect to an alternative universe either means connecting to one that already exists, or creating a whole new universe from scratch. (The latter implies an impossibility as to create a parallel universe from the time point of right now, would mean having an equal amount of energy consistent to what currently resides in the universe right now.)
Infinite Universes is however a "Can of Worms" considering many theorists will have many different points implying the possibilities versus the impossibilities.

Time Travel is currently borderline Fringe (the Sci-fi side) and the brainfood for Science Fiction. A universal law is that "Matter can not travel faster than light speed", in fact it's implied that: for anything to travel at light speed it requires to have no mass.
What this suggests is that you couldn't build a craft and send it back through time by attempting to accelerate Faster than light. It wouldn't be possible.
However this doesn't rule out exemption methods using Parallel Universes, where "Information" can travel faster than light (because it doesn't require mass) allowing for a universe bridging system to be chronologically aligned different from the standard interpretation of parallel. (It actually explains Relativity, where any time period is mapped to another time period recursively.)

Psychics are false as what they imply they are capable of is sketchy, unachievable, unrealistic to thermodynamics and are manipulated pseudo-beliefs perpetuated to be real for utilisation in fraud.

 

Well I've done extensive research, and spoken to a number of proffessors, scientists and thinkers. After exploring every single possible permutation there isnt a single universe out of the infinite number possible....where you get laid darksidZz, sorry.

 

going by wmap results the universe appears to be pretty close to flat. and if it is flat then the universe is infinite. so if the science says it is infinite then i'll believe it to be so.

 

Assuming there are alternate universes, I see no reason to suppose that the laws of physics would be different.

In the absence of experimental evidence (not available yet) or some cogent arguments, I see no reason to think that the laws of physics would be different in an altenatie universe.

Is there any reason to assume that there are alternative universes?

 

I understand that if the spacetime fabric of a universe curves around on itself and you travelled across that universe in a spaceship, you would end up back where you started, but why does a flat universe imply that it is infinite?

Another query for Styder, seeing as though darksidZz is doing the "Do you believes":

Do you believe in retrocausality?

 

flat or hyperbolic result in an infinite universe. from observation we know it is not the latter. the site below gives a basic explanation....

http://www.universetoday.com/38269/infinite-universe/

 

Alternative universes, if they exist are probably trans-dimentional as ours is. Ours is, it seems, a rather tame universe insofar as it allows life. Theorists postulate that there up to 11 dimensions, but although theroetically possible nobody seems to know just what they are. Some say that some of these dimensions are on a quantum level, and are necessarily small, though all this is speculation suggesetd by some rather selective math.

Other Universes may be quite wierd compared to ours. If they contain no matter they can apparently be two dimentional - and if they contain no matter, they contain no time as there is nothing there to measure it by.

A multi-dimentional universe in excess of our own would be really weird. It may be possible for objects to take shortcuts through multi-spacetime. The perception of time and distance might be totally warped. One day you could leave your house, walk for ten minutes and go a mile. Later that day you could walk for ten minutes and go ten miles..

All of this is of course speculation, but one mans' guess is as good as another. The science behind it is good.

 

What's "trans-dimensional"?
How do you know ours is?

Selective?

Is that because forces (i.e. not matter) can't vary with time? Oh, they can.

These two sentences are contradictory.

 

Hi Dywyddyr. The math was supposed to show 100% for our dimensions, but came back at 120% and the only way the math would work is if we had 11 dimensions. This doesn't mean they exist, they could just be a construct to make the math fit.

I assume if these dimensions exist they interact in some way. I said trans-dimentional as time is not a static dimension. If you can suggest a better term I'd be happy to adopt it.

I'm no math guy, but I'm sure the math and the science are good. That these can lead to educated guesses about universes that may or may not exist is not at odds with the science I think.

I'm no expert my any stretch of the imagination, but we were asked to speculate and I'd rather do this bearing the science behind it in mind.

And you're right about time existing I think. I was thinking of Stephen Hawking talking about the resonance of an atom being enough to clock time, but an energy wavelength would do just as well. The question is, would you have energy in a universe without matter? Would the energy cause virtual particals in that universe as it does here?

Thanks for pointing these out.

 

What math. And 100% of what?

Link please. As far as I'm aware these dimensions are definitely more than a "fudge".

I'm not sure why you feel the need to coin a term because "time is not static". How do you know time is not static? Evidence please.*

There are "educated guesses" and there are supported hypotheses/ theories. One is science, the other isn't.

We can only speculate. Which even less scientific than an educated guess. But we cannot say (as far as I know) for certain that energy cannot exist without any matter at all. And I'm damn sure DH or someone will jump in and tell me if I'm wrong.

* With regard to time "not being static" I'm guessing you say this because today isn't yesterday and so on? If so ask yourself when you're next driving and get to the end of your road - what moved? You (along the length of the road) or the road itself? Time is a dimension, like length etc in that it's fundamental. Does length move or do we move along the length?

 

A link on M theory explaining 11 dimensions. I can't remember where i read the math involved, but I'll keep looking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

An older New Scientist article that talks in depth about the theory before Mtheory really got going...http://155.198.210.128/~mduff/talks/1984 - The Eleven Dimensions of Reality.pdf

A link explaining why some of the dimentions are thought to be so tiny..http://www.unishivaji.ac.in/shivsandesh/archive/vol5jan06/DrSTNavare_Paper.pdf

As for the question did I move or did the road move, Well, it's both. Every action having an equal and opposite reaction. Stepping off has an imperceptable reaction and pushes the road backwards rotating the earth a little.
Whether this would hold up in a different universe that might not obey our laws is a nother speculative question.

Aha..This explains the math in a cursory way, and use the unit 1.00 where I used 100% http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...0tmhDw&usg=AFQjCNGTfJIVd5BWSkxWfYfWvX2U8OsgHw

I don't know your level of proficiency, but these are not bad explainations.

 

How much do you think your car moves the road?

How much do you think your step affects the Earth?
If you claim the road/ Earth is actually moving (no matter how little) consider this: two cars driving in opposite directions at the same time on the same road.
Apart from the possible collision! can you see a problem with your interpretation? You have the Earth being counter-rotated in two (mutually opposing) directions at the same time.
How about: the road/ Earth isn't an homogeneous solid. Any reaction would be lost completely before it had a chance to affect the Earth since the materials directly under the tyres will "soak" it up as one explanation.

 

A pretty picture and more reading on multiple dimentions including a bit from Steven hawking on how complicated the math was: http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...vuCjDw&usg=AFQjCNFSTLIwQZQrsTe-PA_kbQ8q_Y_i1Q

Kaluza and Klien explain extra dimentions using superstrings. A little more technical..http://www.sukidog.com/jpierre/strings/extradim.htm

 

However it is true that a car will exert an equal and opposite reaction. This is in accordence with Newtons' laws of motion. But the car's mass is miniscule to that of the earth attached to the road. The earth will counter rotate, but immeasurably.

 

So in my example with the two cars you claim that the Earth is counter-rotating in two mutually opposing directions at the same time?
What happens if you have four cars, all driving at 90[sup]o[/sup] to each other? Then the Earth is rotating North, South, East AND West. Again, all at the same time.

 

Yes. If they're going the same speed they will cancel each others' effect out. if not, the car going the faster will exert a reactive force minus the force of the slower car.

 

Hey D, man, blame it on Newton not me..It's newton and his laws of motion, not mine!