|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:35 pm
I am sorry for this vague question, but I remember hearing some while ago that there was evidence (miniscule level gravitational pulls? or something) supporting the idea of parallel or seperate universes from our own.
I'd like to know what exactly the evidence was, if it was credible, et cetera.
Also, I'd like to pose to you a hypothetical situation of our existence:
Since there was no time before time, obviously, and the universe itself may cease to exist "again" (everything gets sucked into a black hole? dark matter stops existing? etc.?), and the universe is restored to a state of no time, and happens all over again, is it possible that some underlying energy or imprints thereof of what happened before still exists in the fabric of whatever is holding the "golf ball" singularity (I know this sounds crazy, but you know... I like to hear reasons), and as we go forward through time after the big bang repeats itself, we come across random imprints and we experience...
Deja Vu.
Or Psychic mediums of sorts.
Thanks. =D
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:30 pm
The only things I've heard about things outside our universe interacting with this universe are Lisa Randall's interbrane graviton hypothesis and that speculation that dark matter might be matter on parallel branes.
Neither really has any evidence, as far as I know.
As for your second question, I've got two questions, and unfortunately they're the standard two questions: how, and why?
Basically, in order for that hypothesis to be correct, you'd have to assume that
1: there is something out there that can take such imprints and either release them at specific times as measured within the universe or mark them as being associated with specific in-universe times,
2: the universe would repeat itself closely enough that such imprints would be meaningful
and 3: the human psyche is able to pick up imprints from outside this universe.
All three are highly doubtful, starting with the fact that there's no evidence that anything exists outside our universe, continuing with the notion that the universe would end at its own starting position and continue on the exact same route, down to the quantum mechanical interactions, as the first universe, and ending with the question of how a human mind would be able to detect something that doesn't leave a noticeable physical trace in our universe.
Once again, besides Lisa Randall's brane theory, I have never heard a well-formulated notion of "outside the universe." Even string theory, for the most part, confines itself inside this universe, albeit in ten dimensions. In the same way that there is no time outside the universe, there may well be no space outside this universe, and with no time and no space, there isn't anything that can hold any imprint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:20 pm
Well as far as outside the universe goes I hear stuff to the effect all the time. But of course if it is entirely outside of the universe then so are its influences and therefore there can be no effect caused by them here in the universe. However if they do affect the things in the universe then by that virtue I would consider them to be a part of it anyway. Yes I know its a bit of a tautology but I still think it is useful in the sense that it gives a clear definition of what is and what is not part of the universe. With it we can categorize everything that has has had or will have any effect on anything that we consider to be part of the universe as being part of the universe also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
