Cycles of Time

Post Reply New Topic

I think a little background is in order. Firstly, I am a Polish-born catholic who has lived in Canada well over two decades who has a joint Bs.c in Physics and math as well as a very recent JD in Canadian law. Sometimes, in my spare time I conjecture about the nature of reality and the said implications that are associated with. Although, I am Catholic as forementioned, I often try to discern the nature of our reality in a secular and atheistic manner, my catholic faith notwithstanding.

I have recently though of a theory that could explain a secular answer to the question of the afterlife.

As most of you know, the universe formed by way of the Big Bang. Time could be reasonably discerned as coinciding with the first few seconds of the universe. Although the universe is currently accelerating at an ever growing pace, if the mass of the universe reaches a certain critical density (symbolized by omega) It would recollapse and coalsce again into a single Big Crunch. Then another Big Bang would form again, and time itself would repeat. Could our lives repeat exactly as before. Time obviously would reset itself in a similar moment with each oscillation the universe undergoes.

Quite a lot of physicists have fixated on this sort of reconciliation, however usually it was largely to do with the perceived mortalities of the universe. I say plural mortalities because obviously none of us definitively know the fate of all this but assuming a big crunch, one could look at it as a rather lifelike event; oscillation implies that beneath all the higher oscillatory functions we observe (tides, city rush hours, radiation), there might exist such a function that depends on only one extreme - your hypothetical omega value strikes me as rather elastic whereas if it's sufficiently forceful to cause a crunch, the crunch would be the the only predicate. No chicken or egg, just fission to fusion & back. This almost appears to me to be saying omega could represent black body phenomena in a no-atoms-touching scenario. Do you think dark matter & dark energy could coalesce & exhibit black body radioactive characteristics?

edit: MORTALITIES This thinkpad needs recasing!

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

You do not even need to consider dark energy; it is just a matter of embedding the speed of light into hubbles formula. With a minor standard deviation it is possible to calculate the maximum radius of the universe. But likewise, dark energy cannot accelerate forever because of the universe's ultimate speed limit.

Excuse the (partial) allegory but I think it's possible that Leonard Suskind's quantum non-locality model points towards interplay between disparate forms of energy & matter. If a crunch is possible, nothing would be accelerating indefinitely. Striae sufficiently ingrained inevitably merge with adjacent substratum.

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

Indeed. But as I have shown to you, the universe will eventually cease expanding at a faster velocity via basic cosmological and principles of physics. Can dark energy accelerate faster than c? Is that what you are attempting to illustrate? I do not know how quantum mechanics is relevant, although that was my main discipline in my physics program.

I'd say we can keep our constants; the contingency I'm attempting to grasp is that either dark matter or dark energy would create sufficient drag on one of their counterparts to engender convection in between.

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

But for all we know, both are only a source of a gravitational force. Plus we do not have enough scientific data to examine the interaction they have between visible matter and each other in an exhaustive manner.

Though we also know they're primarily distributed where we observe none. I think in my scenario weak interaction with visible matter would be plenty - it's about surface area.

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

My astrophysics professor always emphasized to me that there is literally no difference between dark energy and dark matter. We only know they are a source of gravitational strength, thus any difference between is likely conjectural. It would nullify the argument that one of these forces acts as a drag to the other and vice versa.

(Sorry for all the edits, I should be sleeping )

Your professor was rather opinionated though I'll humor them; why would such indistinct forces' weak interactions outside their realms not create drag? To me this would seem to indicate repulsion sufficient to offload that drag outside the dark/matter energy construct, thus compressing surrounding space.

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

F5 is our friend around here...

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

As I have mentioned, we do not have enough scientific data to fully understand the interaction between these forces, save that they are an unknown source of gravity.

Anyways i think I need to sleep too.

I hope your thread lives - being that sleep isn't quite an option yet for me I'm happy to marinate in my own tryptamines & make sure of that.

Out of curiosity, what role might you think Hawking radiation plays in all this?

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

It evaporates black holes To be honest with you, I simply do not know enough about Hawking radiation to really probe its implication in this matter. Ask me about cosomology and quantum mechanics and we can talk forever. Although I tend to look towards local realism and classical mechanics in matters of great macroscopy.

Knowing how big the universe is and how small I am in it forces me to endure ceaseless existential crisies.

Well yes although implicit in radiation is heat. What I'm positing is that provided a bunch of drains for any & all matter dotted throughout this thought experiment, that's an awful lot of heat. Where does the convective drag interact?

This link provides at least some of the calculatory basis for my viewpoint... I suppose I view all my existential crises as a wave state, I might as well clue you into the fact that I tend to verge on neo-pagan thought more than most.

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

Thermal radiation is a conduit for heat, yes, but how does it relate to the point your making and its association with dark energy and dark matter. I am unsure of what you are trying to convey to me.

It is too late today for me to post anymore, but I will definitely check on this thread tomorrow.