Infinverses Cosmology

[Jurandyr]

THE INFINVERSES COSMOLOGY
The beauty of Cosmology relies on its generosity : you are always in very good company even when you are totally wrong.
Physics is divided in 04 categories :

- Conceptual
- Theoretic
- Experimental
- Observational

This document is a conceptual document.

To become a Theory somebody must write it in Math.

Once you have a Theory then we go to one of the next two levels to see if the Theory is right.

Unless we have an observation or an experiment that confirms, or not, the theory, all we have are endless discussions.

The Infinverses is the ultimate macro structure of everything.
It is composed by The Infinite and The Universes.
There is an Infinite which is dimensionless, timeless, immaterial, continuous, eternal, homogeneous, isotropic, highly and continuously active and reservoir of an infinite amount of Energy.

Universes are discrete space-time structures in continuous expansion in both space and time with a pre determined finite existence in time continuously loosing energy at an increasing rate, containing or not particles, freely floating within the Infinite. The amount of Universes is finite but countless. They exist within the Infinite.
Permanently and continuously huge amounts of Energy are released through the collapse of a primordial singularity creating a Universe. Creation of Universes is a continuous and eternal process generating a finite but countless Universes which are discrete and without any possible communication among them. This process creates a biunivocal relation between a given Universe and its primordial singularity. Because the Infinite is homogeneous and isotropic, all Universes obey the same laws of Physics.

The communication among the universes is not possible because they (the space time structure) are expanding at speeds greater than the speed of light and any information travels at the speed of light.
Another explanation is the biunivocal relation between a given Universe and its primordial singularity. If communication among them were possible, this postulate was broken.

Any given Universe is composed by two fundamentals entities : the space-time structure (stage) and all elementary particles with all possible arrangements from atoms to galaxies (actors). At the moment of creation, part of the Energy is used to shape the stage and part to form the actors. It is possible to exist two different types of Universes : with the stage and actors (Gravity, Electro-Magnetism, Strong Nuclear Force and Weak Nuclear Force exist in these universes) and only with the stage (only Gravity exists in these universes).

The ratio between the energy content of the space-time fabric and the energy amount of all particles, determine if life, as we know it, is possible at any given Universe.
While the Fundamental Forces act within the context of particles, Gravity is a property, not a force, of the space time fabric. It manifests as a force due to the interaction between particles and space time.
The expansion of the Universe is powered by the energy of the space-time fabric.
Higher the amount of energy of the space-time fabric, more time this universe will exist. The end of a Universe is characterized by the end of the space-time fabric. First, all particles disappear resulting in a Universe with only space-time which will continue its expansion until the total consumption of its energy. At this moment we have what was already called Big Rip.
As previous said, the expansion of the Universe is powered by the energy of the space-time fabric. The consequence of a space time with less energy is the decrease of the resistance of deformation caused by the presence of mass. The same mass will create a bigger deformation of space-time provoking the increase of the gravity with the passing of time.

[Atreyu]

THE INFINVERSES COSMOLOGY

I do endorse the so called "multiverse" model, or as you want to put it - the "Infiniverse" model. However, I am strongly opposed to the general terminology used when discussing this idea. I prefer to stick with the historical and proper definition of Universe as "All", or "Everything that exists". This means that there cannot be anything existing outside of it, nor could there be more than one. However, there certainly can be things existing outside of the boundaries of our space-time, which naturally people will envision as being similar to our 3-D Universe, hence the term "another universe". But I prefer to say that there are an infinite number of 3-dimensional "realities" or "worlds" or "spaces", all of which exist in parallel, and all of which form the real Universe. In other words, the "multiverse model" has enabled us to see that really our Universe is not a sort of "infinite sphere" in which time passes, but rather an infinite number of various "infinite spheres" existing in parallel. The term "Universe" merely entails much more than our ancestors thought it did. But of course this is immaterial to the idea itself.

The beauty of Cosmology relies on its generosity : you are always in very good company even when you are totally wrong.
Physics is divided in 04 categories :

- Conceptual
- Theoretic
- Experimental
- Observational

Your fourth category need not exist. To experiment, one must observe. You cannot perform an experiment without observing things. Similarly, if you are observing something in order to confirm or deny a theory, this implies that you are conducting an experiment. And if you are simply observing to find out what is what, without already having a theory developed, then you are not doing physics. So properly speaking you should combine #3 and #4 into just "Experimental".

Physics (and all of science) goes like this:
1. Conceptual - Scientists come up with some ideas and propositions. (in and of itself this is philosophy, and if it goes no further then it remains philosophy.
2. Theoretic - The ideas are formulated into something more exact and precise, something that can be explained mathematically. The idea is "put on paper".
3. Experimental - The theory is tested by devising experiments. (which naturally will incorporate some observation)

No need for any fourth category.

To become a Theory somebody must write it in Math.

Yep. Quite right.

Once you have a Theory then we go to one of the next two levels to see if the Theory is right.

Yep. Only really, as I said before, your "next two levels" should be reduced to one.

Unless we have an observation or an experiment that confirms, or not, the theory, all we have are endless discussions.

Yep. Because the idea will remain in the realm of philosophy, and in philosophy all we do is talk and think. If you can't "write the idea in Math" as you put it, then it is only a philosophical idea and cannot enter the realm of science.

The Infinverses is the ultimate macro structure of everything.

Obviously.

It is composed by The Infinite and The Universes.
There is an Infinite which is dimensionless, timeless, immaterial, continuous, eternal, homogeneous, isotropic, highly and continuously active and reservoir of an infinite amount of Energy.

I dispute this. I see no need for any medium (the Infinite) in which all these "Universes" exist. There could be an infinite number of Universes, and one or more of the Universes themselves might be infinite (relatively speaking). You could just say that "the Infiniverse is infinite", or, since that's implied in the term, you could just say something like "There are an infinite number of parallel universes like our own". I see no need to posit something else. "The Infinite" is simply another term for what you are calling "The Infiniverse". You could have simply called it "The Infinite" instead of "The Infiniverse". There is no need to posit any medium, since one is not required. All of the Universes can be regarded as existing in the same place if you enlarge your idea of "place" to the most macro level possible.

Or, as the ancient gurus always said: "Really, Everything is Here and Everything is actually happening Now". This dictum can apply to both our Universe, or all the Universes taken collectively. "Everything is really Here" can apply to a space of any number of dimensions --- one, two, three, four, five, or more. It's all "Here" when a consciousness can perceive everything at once. "There" has no meaning when an Entity can perceive it All....

Universes are discrete space-time structures in continuous expansion in both space and time with a pre determined finite existence in time continuously loosing energy at an increasing rate, containing or not particles, freely floating within the Infinite.

The first red highlight denotes a basic error. The second I find highly questionable.

You are wrong that each Universe is discrete, and that, as you say later, there is no "communication" between them. They can affect each other because they're connected in the higher dimensions of space-time. In fact, at the highest dimension of space they are all One. The Infiniverse is One. To separate the Infiniverse into separate Universes only requires removing a dimension of space from the mix, just as we can consider two separate circles drawn on a piece of paper as totally "discrete" by removing the next higher dimension - the paper in which they are on. But once we do take the paper into account (the higher dimension in which both circles exist), then we clearly see that the two circles could affect each other --- bounce off each other, combine, rotate around each other, etc.

This connection, or "communication" as you call it later, can be seen in the idea of anti-matter, and in known processes which create mass such as pair production. The general idea here is that anti-matter is the connection between our Universe and a parallel one, and that pair production is new mass being generated in our Universe by getting it from another. But at any rate, we have lots of evidence for the interaction of our Universe with others, and the idea is conceptually flawed because things which are apparently separated always become one when we take the next higher dimension of space-time into account. The higher dimension of space always connects together the things of lessor dimensions which exist within it.

The amount of Universes is finite but countless. They exist within the Infinite.

Interesting idea, but could you elaborate? How can something finite be countless?

Permanently and continuously huge amounts of Energy are released through the collapse of a primordial singularity creating a Universe.

Explain this more as well. I think I get your idea, and do not oppose it, but I want to make sure. Are you suggesting that a parallel Universe can be created after a "Big Crunch" in another one?

Creation of Universes is a continuous and eternal process generating a finite but countless Universes which are discrete and without any possible communication among them. This process creates a biunivocal relation between a given Universe and its primordial singularity. Because the Infinite is homogeneous and isotropic, all Universes obey the same laws of Physics.

As before, I question what is in red. In blue I suspect it is true, although of course I wouldn't explain it via some kind of medium ("the Infinite"). I just take that position because I simply can't envision things so Chaotic and Orderless. Surely all of the Universes must have some basic parameters which they all possess, whether it's the "laws of physics" or something else.

The communication among the universes is not possible because they (the space time structure) are expanding at speeds greater than the speed of light and any information travels at the speed of light.
Another explanation is the biunivocal relation between a given Universe and its primordial singularity. If communication among them were possible, this postulate was broken.

This is quite false. If you already understood my example with the circles on the paper, then you'll already understand why. If not, I'll continue.

You already stated that universes expand in space and time. What do you think that means? Let us go back to my example of circles on a piece of paper. The circles, as you admit, are expanding. This means that eventually they will run out of space and start bumping into each other. Eventually, assuming a finite area of paper, they would have to expand into the next dimension higher than themselves - the third dimension. We would see the circles coming out of their "paper domain" and becoming spheres. They would have went from 2-D objects, to 3-D objects, and that is exactly what it means to "expand in space and time". The "and time" simply means more dimensions of space (space-time). So if our circles are merely "expanding in space", the "space" means the "space they are in" (2-D), and our circles will only grow bigger on the sheet of paper. However, if they expand also "in time", then our circles will grow outside of the space they are in, which for the circles is their perception of time.

"Growing in space" means growth in the same number of dimensions of space. But "growing in space and time" (space-time) means growth outside of the current dimensions of space. And if dimensions can be added, then two things currently absolutely separated (in terms of space), can become one.

At any rate, your view of completely isolated Universes floating around in the "medium of Infinity" is quite false. This "medium of Infinity" you envision is simply the next higher dimension of space in which all those Universes exist.

Any given Universe is composed by two fundamentals entities : the space-time structure (stage) and all elementary particles with all possible arrangements from atoms to galaxies (actors). At the moment of creation, part of the Energy is used to shape the stage and part to form the actors. It is possible to exist two different types of Universes : with the stage and actors (Gravity, Electro-Magnetism, Strong Nuclear Force and Weak Nuclear Force exist in these universes) and only with the stage (only Gravity exists in these universes).

The first highlighted red is highly suspicious. You have already said that all Universes "have the same laws of physics", but now some don't contain particles, and some don't have 3 of the 4 forces? How can you reconcile that with the "same laws of physics"? This is a blatant contradiction.

And the second highlight is really suspect. How can gravity exist without mass ("actors", particles)?

You really need to work on this part of your thesis.

The ratio between the energy content of the space-time fabric and the energy amount of all particles, determine if life, as we know it, is possible at any given Universe.

Interesting idea. I'd like to know how you arrived at it.

While the Fundamental Forces act within the context of particles, Gravity is a property, not a force, of the space time fabric. It manifests as a force due to the interaction between particles and space time.

Differentiating between gravity as a property or force seems to be nitpicking. Obviously, you could consider it as either. What is important is how you elaborate on how it works - "due to the interactions between particles and space-time" - because that basic idea is not anything new.

The expansion of the Universe is powered by the energy of the space-time fabric.
Higher the amount of energy of the space-time fabric, more time this universe will exist. The end of a Universe is characterized by the end of the space-time fabric. First, all particles disappear resulting in a Universe with only space-time which will continue its expansion until the total consumption of its energy. At this moment we have what was already called Big Rip.
As previous said, the expansion of the Universe is powered by the energy of the space-time fabric. The consequence of a space time with less energy is the decrease of the resistance of deformation caused by the presence of mass. The same mass will create a bigger deformation of space-time provoking the increase of the gravity with the passing of time.

This part was definitely the best part of your thesis. Very interesting ideas here. However, you must elaborate more on gravity and mass, because obviously you are saying something new here by proposing that you can have mass and gravity without particles. It's apparent that you must elaborate on your definition of "particles", and the relationship between matter, mass, and gravity....

[Jurandyr]

I really would like to thank you for all your comments. They are all great and they will force me to think a lot about the subject.

[ThamiorTheThinker]

Quick correction: The terms theory and hypothesis are confused in this post. A theory is what a scientist formalizes after they have tested their hypothesis and analyzed all of their collected data. The hypothesis is what is tested.

Now that I've dealt with that minor point, on to the subject at hand.

You claim that universes are discrete in both space and time. I cannot say that this postulate is necessarily the case, as we can only view the observable universe. Of course, you also restricted yourself to speaking about universes which are similar to the one we preside in. I a multiverse model, we ought to not assume unnecessarily that all universes are found with similar constraints. Perhaps some universes (assuming that they, indeed, actually exist) have laws of physics which do not proceed under 4D spacetime, or even 6D quantum phase-space.

My point there is that, in order to discuss multiverses, we must first establish the notion that all universes are not, by default, identical in base properties. This is possibly the case, and that possibility may be discussed freely - but seeing as we live within this 4D spacetime, with this view of these cosmos, we cannot make such postulates and claim we have knowledge of their truth.