[Deadboy90]

Quote:

The discovery of these primordial waves could solidify the idea that our young universe went through a rapid growth spurt called inflation. And that theory is linked to the idea that the universe is constantly giving birth to smaller "pocket" universes within an ever-expanding multiverse.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25249-multiverse-gets-real-with-glimpse-of-big-bang-ripples.html#.UyklWBxyf4d

 

[Tsumi]

Then wouldn't our universe also be a "pocket universe" inside another pocket universe, and that universe another "pocket universe," and so on? When would it stop? It's like Inception in reverse.



The relevant image for those of you too lazy to click on the article.

 

[tombom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsumi

Then wouldn't our universe also be a "pocket universe" inside another pocket universe, and that universe another "pocket universe," and so on? When would it stop? It's like Inception in reverse.



The relevant image for those of you too lazy to click on the article.

Yeah, that's a pretty accurate description of how the universe works lol. Is it really that hard to believe? It doesn't stop.

 

[EliteReplay]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsumi

Then wouldn't our universe also be a "pocket universe" inside another pocket universe, and that universe another "pocket universe," and so on? When would it stop? It's like Inception in reverse.



The relevant image for those of you too lazy to click on the article.

sorry i don't understand this scientific s words can some one explain me the same with basic words

 

[Exidous]

Polarization is the orientation of the waves. Just like radio communication waves you can have two perpendicular to eachother. One horizontal and one vertical. There is also circular polarization where the orientation of the wave rotates as it travels.

The idea they are using is that the polarization of the CMBr's is different than the average CMBr's you see everyday due to the concentration of gravity being different before the rapid inflation.

 

[tpi2007]

Keep it on-topic guys. No inflammatory posts please.

Thanks.

 

[Tsumi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliteReplay

sorry i don't understand this scientific s words can some one explain me the same with basic words

What you should compare is the yellow and blue pictures. The yellow shows normal polarization, and you should note that they all point to the center. In the blue picture, you can see that rather than pointing at the center, they seem to point along two lines. You can see the curve created. Those are the patterns that are looked for, which are pattens created by the bending of light by gravity. The bottom picture shows what the actual data looks like, and how the light is being twisted.

 

[Frankzro]

This may sound odd, that means there was a first universe, which would be called " The Truverse". I know its out there, but I don't think we will ever find the first Universe.

 

[john55576]

So it's a fractal?

 

[Vagrant Storm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frankzro

This may sound odd, that means there was a first universe, which would be called " The Truverse". I know its out there, but I don't think we will ever find the first Universe.

It likely has been transferred into energy and doesn't exist any more. Though its possible that there really never was a first Universe...I mean could you pinpoint the first second? Some scholars like to say that time begins when a Universe begins, but whatever was there before the Universe would have been affected by time as well...even if it was nothing. If time didn't move forward for it...it would still be nothing.

 

[jdstock76]

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that there could actually be a "big bang". An actual start to the universe. Let for a second say there was a "big bang", what was there before it? Empty space? All matter had to come from some where. Time never existing and starting with the "big bang"? Seems like most of these theories solidify certain religious beliefs. Not trying to get that conversation started btw. Just an observation. Why is it so hard to believe that the universe was just here, that what we see is just expansion and contraction of the universe. Why did it have to start from nothingness?

 

[Ashuiegi]

noise in the instruments ,...
as for what was there before , it s all relative , the whole universe matter can be just a speck of dust in another scale , then it make more sens but you need to decide if it s infinite or not to continue,....

 

[absh4x0r]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdstock76

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that there could actually be a "big bang". An actual start to the universe. Let for a second say there was a "big bang", what was there before it? Empty space? All matter had to come from some where. Time never existing and starting with the "big bang"? Seems like most of these theories solidify certain religious beliefs. Not trying to get that conversation started btw. Just an observation. Why is it so hard to believe that the universe was just here, that what we see is just expansion and contraction of the universe. Why did it have to start from nothingness?

The big bang theory prove that there was something before the big bang.

Big bang means some things exploded, collided, crossed one other things path.

IMO we are a thousand needles away from knowing the truth.
I keep in my head that ants cannot see what they cannot conceive, nor any bacteria. I think we are just like them and most likely there are millions of things we cannot understand and thus see the way it really is.

 

[Vagrant Storm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdstock76

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that there could actually be a "big bang". An actual start to the universe. Let for a second say there was a "big bang", what was there before it? Empty space? All matter had to come from some where. Time never existing and starting with the "big bang"? Seems like most of these theories solidify certain religious beliefs. Not trying to get that conversation started btw. Just an observation. Why is it so hard to believe that the universe was just here, that what we see is just expansion and contraction of the universe. Why did it have to start from nothingness?

I like the cosmic recycling theories...makes things a lot easier to accept. Basically you start with all matter as we know it in one spot. As time goes on, it eventually gets unstable and pow...big bang. Eventually the matter clumps together again in the form of black holes which gather more and more energy and mass until there is nothing left but black holes. Then the bigger black holes gobble up the smaller black holes and so on and so forth until you get most the matter energy back in one spot...pow...big bang again and you rinse and repeat. The residual energy and mass that isn't gobbled up by the mega black hole is what could be classified as a new universe and each time a big bang happens the fundamental forces (gravity, weak and strong nucleic attraction, magnetism) get smashed together and when they separate they could be all mixed up and work differently...meaning different laws of physics for each universe.

Though eventually a universe will simply turn into energy (radiation mainly) and then just slowly seep back into other universes to get back into the big bang cycle.

This is my favorite theory...though some times I doubt it just because it is so easy to understand.

 

[Sadmoto]

Very cool read!

and I'm with vagrant on the recycling theory, its something that not only goes on in a cosmic scale but also micro.
Nature always finds a way to balance itself out and have cycles for Everything. One day our dead bodies will turn into fossil fuel like we're using now in a long time.

Trees dies,leaves fall and give nutrients to the ground for the tree to come back. Planets or say stars eventually burn out when out of energy, boom into dust and bits, then gravity over time recollects and rebuilds into a new.
Life goes on.

We're making the world hot, ill be betting on an "ice age" in a few hundred years at the rate we use energy.

As for before the big bang, who knows, when we figure out the universe's cycle it may give us answers we need, its sorta naive to think we're the first universe and/or only.
I think there are things going on in grand scales where universes are just leaves in a giant forest. But that's just me guessing, its all any of us can do.
To each their own

 

[Deadboy90]

I'm a fan of the "Bubble multiverse" theory. Basically it goes something like: every universe is like one bubble in a bubble bath. All roiling, shrinking, expanding, splitting into multiples and constantly popping in and out of existence.

 

[jdstock76]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdstock76

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that there could actually be a "big bang". An actual start to the universe. Let for a second say there was a "big bang", what was there before it? Empty space? All matter had to come from some where. Time never existing and starting with the "big bang"? Seems like most of these theories solidify certain religious beliefs. Not trying to get that conversation started btw. Just an observation. Why is it so hard to believe that the universe was just here, that what we see is just expansion and contraction of the universe. Why did it have to start from nothingness?

I like the cosmic recycling theories...makes things a lot easier to accept. Basically you start with all matter as we know it in one spot. As time goes on, it eventually gets unstable and pow...big bang. Eventually the matter clumps together again in the form of black holes which gather more and more energy and mass until there is nothing left but black holes. Then the bigger black holes gobble up the smaller black holes and so on and so forth until you get most the matter energy back in one spot...pow...big bang again and you rinse and repeat. The residual energy and mass that isn't gobbled up by the mega black hole is what could be classified as a new universe and each time a big bang happens the fundamental forces (gravity, weak and strong nucleic attraction, magnetism) get smashed together and when they separate they could be all mixed up and work differently...meaning different laws of physics for each universe.

Though eventually a universe will simply turn into energy (radiation mainly) and then just slowly seep back into other universes to get back into the big bang cycle.

This is my favorite theory...though some times I doubt it just because it is so easy to understand.

I actually like this theory and somewhat agree with it.

What if there are multiple universes that means they have boundaries or a shell.

There is actually a theory that matter getting sucked into a black is going into another universe essentially creating them and their "Big Bang".

 

[Vagrant Storm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdstock76

I actually like this theory and somewhat agree with it.

What if there are multiple universes that means they have boundaries or a shell.

There is actually a theory that matter getting sucked into a black is going into another universe essentially creating them and their "Big Bang".

Yeah the boundaries would be the laws of physics...as crazy as it sounds, there could be a definite spot where a beam of light from our universe would freeze solid or some thing when it crossed into a different universe because radiation worked differently there. Though this is where the theory can get a little hard to grasp again. If enough of the universes collided, you could get "pockets" where the old rules still apply...I've read some people theorizing that this could be where dark matter comes from. Sort of like dumping a bunch of finely crushed salt into water...most of it will dissolve and become part of the solution, but some of the salt will still be sitting in the bottom of the beaker waiting for some action to be applied to it to get it to change. In the case of universes, the stir rod would be a Big Bang.

 

[assaulth3ro911]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliteReplay

sorry i don't understand this scientific s words can some one explain me the same with basic words

To infinity and beyond?

 

[DMills]

we are using some crazy frequencies to get this data!



just for comparison: